RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00503 COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. ________________________________________________________________ __ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His discharge was inequitable because it was based on an isolated incident. He had no other adverse actions and received numerous awards during his service. Moreover, he is unable to obtain services he deserves as a veteran. In support of his request the applicant provides a copy of DD Form 293, Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of the United States. His complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ __ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 29 Jul 1982, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force for a period of four years. On 6 Nov 1986, his commander notified him that he was recommending he be discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Administrative Separation of Airmen. The specific reason for his action is reflected in the Notification Memorandum at Exhibit B. On 6 Nov 1986, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the discharge notification. On 26 Nov 1986, the Staff Judge Advocate (SJA) found the discharge legally sufficient. On 19 Feb 1986, the SJA requested the applicant be placed on administrative hold due to his inappropriate conduct and false statements during out-processing. On 24 Feb 1987, he was discharged from the Air Force with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The narrative reason for separation was “Misconduct-Drug Abuse.” He served a total of 4 years, 6 months and 26 days of active duty. On 20 Sep 2013, a request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit C). On 5 Oct 2013, the applicant provided an extensive personal statement regarding the events that led to his discharge. When he joined the military at the age of 18, he had a wife and a new baby. His father had been a doctor in the Air Force and his brother just came back from his duty in the Army. Although he feels it was not justified at the time; he admits his mistake and has suffered the consequences with the type of discharge he received. He has lived a humble life and has been happily married for over 31 years. He has not done anything spectacular; however, he is very proud that he has raised two very strong happy children. He and his wife are proud Catholics and believe in a strict and loving environment. His son is a successful engineer and his daughter is in her second year of college. He would hate for his discharge to affect the future of his children. He is a model citizen and takes pride in his character and reputation. He did not allow a bad situation to hinder his family's future. In further support of his request, the applicant also provides a statement from his wife who asserts that he has more integrity than anyone she knows. They have lived a modest and happy life raising their children who have promising futures that will benefit the community. Her husband has built a strong and lasting career as a Network Engineer with Motorola. She beseeches the Board to upgrade his discharge and give him the clemency he deserves. His complete response, with attachment, is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ __ 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, to include his response to the post service request, 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. In the interest of justice, 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 29 Oct 2013, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC- 2013-00503: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 25 Jan 2013, w/atch. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 20 Sep 2013. Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 5 Oct 2013, w/atch. 2 3