RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03740 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to general (under honorable conditions). ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was not given an opportunity to remain in the military to correct his actions. He has dealt with the inadequateness (sic) since his discharge. The discharge has hindered his life. He was a young man when he was discharged and not the best decision maker. He was sorry then, and more so now, realizing what he could have been and what he turned out to be. The applicant did not provide any documentation in support of his request. His complete submission is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 3 May 83, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force. On 1 May 86, his commander notified him he was recommending his separation from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Administrative Separation of Airmen, for Drug Abuse. The specific reasons for this action were: In Apr 86, he wrongfully used and possessed marijuana in violation of Article 112a of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for which he received a Letter of Reprimand; and on, or about 1 Feb 84 to 25 Dec 85, he wrongfully used and distributed marijuana in violation of Article 112a of the UCMJ; and on, or about 8 Dec 85, he operated a motor vehicle while drunk, for which he received an Article 15. On 7 May 86, the Staff Judge Advocate (SJA) found the discharge legally sufficient. On 8 May 86, the commander barred him from four Air Force installations. In an undated memorandum, the applicant acknowledged the discharge action and waived his right to a hearing before an administrative discharge board. On 29 May 86, the Area Defense Counsel stated he briefed the applicant on his right to a discharge board hearing and the effect of his unconditional waiver with regard to a UOTHC discharge. On 4 Jun 86, the SJA recommended a UOTHC discharge, without probation and rehabilitation. On 9 Jun 86, his commander considered him for probation and rehabilitation under the provisions of AFR 39-10; however, he did not find him a suitable candidate. On 27 Jun 86, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force with a UOTHC discharge. He served 3 years, 1 month, and 21 days of total active service. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) provided a copy of an Investigative Report, which is at Exhibit C. On 2 Feb 11, a copy of the FBI report was forwarded to the applicant 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 in the discharge processing. 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 compel us to recommend granting the relief sought on that basis. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis upon which 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 this application in Executive Session on 20 Mar 12, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC- 2011-03740: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 Sep 11. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. FBI Report, dated 10 Nov 11. Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 2 Feb 12.