RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01989 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED _______________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded. _______________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was not guilty of the charges. In support of his request, the applicant provides a letter from the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA). The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. _______________________________________________________________ _ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 8 October 1980, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force. On 1 July 1981, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was recommending his discharge from the Air Force for misconduct (drug abuse). The specific reasons for the discharge action were: a. On 4 February 1981, the applicant received an Article 15 for possession of cocaine. b. On 21 February and 15 April 1981, the applicant solicited an airman to possess marijuana, hashish, LSD, amphetamines, and methaqualone. In addition, he transferred a quantity of marijuana and LSD. c. In a 21 April 1981, the applicant received $120.00 from an airman for the sale of what he alleged to be cocaine. d. On 26 April 1981, the City of Aurora, Colorado charged the applicant with disorderly conduct. He pled guilty to the charge and was fined $41.00. On 1 July 1981, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the discharge notification and after consulting with counsel, he waived his rights to an administrative discharge board with a conditional waiver for a general discharge. On 23 July 1981, the conditional waiver was rejected and he was advised to submit an unconditional waiver or a request for a board hearing. The discharge authority approved the UOTHC discharge without probation and rehabilitation. On 17 August 1981, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFM 39-12, Separation for Unsuitability, Misconduct, Resignation, or Request for Discharge for the Good of the Service and Procedures for the Rehabilitation Program, by reason of misconduct – drug abuse, with an UOTHC discharge. He was credited with 10 months and 13 days of active duty service. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided an investigative report, which is attached at Exhibit C. On 14 December 2010, a copy of the investigative report was forwarded to the applicant along with a request for post- service documentation for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). As of this date, no response has been received by this office. _______________________________________________________________ _ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. 2. The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. 3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we find no evidence of an error or injustice that occurred during the discharge process. Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and within the commander's discretionary authority. The applicant has provided no evidence which would lead us to believe the characterization of the service was contrary to the provisions of the governing regulation, unduly harsh, or disproportionate to the offenses committed. We considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient to convince us to recommend granting the relief sought on that basis. In view of the foregoing, and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we conclude that no basis exists for us to recommend an upgrade to the applicant’s UOTHC discharge. _______________________________________________________________ _ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of newly discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application. _______________________________________________________________ _ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-01989 in Executive Session on 15 February 2011, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 17 May 10, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. FBI Report of Investigation. Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 14 Dec 10, w/atchs.