RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

 AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02379 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded 
to honorable. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He served his country with honor. He was under duress after 
losing his daughter in a fire. Other than that one incident, he 
was a good Airman. He has maintained an honorable life since 
then and requests his discharge be upgraded as a matter of 
honor. 

 

The applicant provides no supporting documentation. 

 

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 28 June 1979. 
On 14 December 1987, his commander notified him of his intent to 
recommend him for discharge for misconduct. Specifically, the 
applicant tested positive for marijuana during a urinalysis. On 
14 December 1987, the applicant acknowledged receipt of his 
commander’s intent. He also acknowledged his right to consult 
counsel and submit matters on his behalf: The Staff Judge 
Advocate reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient on 
29 December 1987. 

 

The discharge authority directed the applicant be discharged 
with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. His 
narrative reason for separation was listed as misconduct – drug 
abuse. He was credited with 8 years, 7 months and 26 days of 
active duty service. 

 

The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) reviewed and denied 
a request from the applicanton 8 June 1989 (Exhibit C). 

 


Pursuant to the Board's request for information, the FBI 
indicated that, on the basis of the evidence provided, they were 
unable to locate an arrest record pertaining to the applicant. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

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, or unduly harsh. We 
considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, 
in the absence of evidence by the applicant attesting to a 
successful post-service adjustment in the years since his 
separation, we are not inclined to extend clemency at this time. 
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find 
no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this 
application. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: 

 

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that 
the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 
that 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 2011-02379 in Executive Session on 12 January 2012, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 


 


 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 11 Mar 11. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFDRB, dated 8 Jun 89, w/atchs.