RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04934 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He has no history (post service) of substance abuse. When he was on active duty a barracks inspection uncovered contraband. Due to the hardships in his personal life, he opted to allow the charges o apply to him. The applicant did not provide any documents in support of his appeal. The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 13 Dec 77, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force.On 23 Oct 80, the applicant was notified by his commander of his intent to recommend his discharge from the Air Force for Drug Abuse under the provisions of AFM 39-12, Separation for Unsuitability, Misconduct, Personal Abuse of Drugs; Resignation or Request for Discharge for the Good of the Service; and Procedures for the Rehabilitation Program, Chapter 2, section B, paragraph 2-15c. The specific reasons for his action was the applicant’s wrongful possession of marijuana and possession of a large strainer with marijuana residue, a large plastic bag with marijuana seeds, stems, numerous papers with marijuana residue, a razor blade with marijuana residue and a clip with marijuana residue, all in violation of Article 134, of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). He received a reduction in grade to airman, a Letter of Reprimand (LOR), and non-judicial punishment under the provisions of Article 15 of the UCMJ. Before recommending discharge the commander noted that the applicant had not shown any evidence of improvement despite rehabilitative efforts. The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge. On 24 Sep 80, the applicant’s commander decided to place the LOR in his Unfavorable Information File (UIF). On 30 Sep 80, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of intent to place the LOR in his UIF. He elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf. On 31 Oct 80, after consulting with legal counsel, the applicant submitted a conditional waiver to waive his right to an administrative discharge board hearing so long as he received a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. On 17 Nov 80, the applicant’s squadron commander recommended to the group commander that the applicant receive a general (under honorable conditions) discharge without the offer of probation or rehabilitation. On 21 Nov 80, the Deputy Staff Judge Advocate (SJA) reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient to support discharge and recommended to the Air Force Flight Test Center commander (AFFTC/CC) that the applicant’s conditional waiver be accepted and he be furnished a general (under honorable conditions) discharge without the offer of probation or rehabilitation. By undated letter, the group commander recommended to the AFFTC/CC that the applicant be furnished a general (under honorable conditions) discharge certificate. On 1 Dec 80, the AFFTC/CC accepted the applicant’s conditional waiver and directed the applicant’s administrative discharge without the offer of probation or rehabilitation. On 2 Dec 80, the applicant was discharged for Misconduct – Drug Abuse – Board Waiver with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions) in the grade of airman first class. He served 2 years, 11 months, and 20 days of total active service. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) indicated that on the basis of the information provided, they were unable to locate an arrest record. 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 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 characterization of the applicant’s discharge based on clemency; however, after considering his overall record of service, the infractions which led to his administrative separation and the lack of post-service information we are not persuaded that an upgrade is warranted. Should the applicant provide evidence pertaining to his post-service activities, we would be willing to reconsider his request. In view of the above and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis upon which to recommend granting the relief sought. 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-2013-04934 in Executive Session on 7 Aug 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Forms 149, dated 13 Oct 13, w/atch. Exhibit B. Applicant's Available Personnel Records. 1 2