RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05360 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He has been a productive member of society since his discharge. He has held progressively responsible positions of employment and has attained significant educational accomplishments. He accepts complete responsibility for the circumstances that precipitated his discharge, which arose from deep personal turmoil that caused him to indulge in alcohol and marijuana. He was fortunate that a random urinalysis test revealed these issues in that it made him see that he was on a destructive path. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: According to the applicant’s military personnel records, he initially entered the Regular Air Force on 8 Feb 77 and served on active duty until 6 Apr 90, when he was furnished a general (under honorable conditions) discharge for misconduct – pattern of discreditable involvement with civil or military authorities. He was credited with 13 years, 1 month, and 17 days of total active service, but charged with lost time during the period 16 Mar 90 through 27 Mar 90. A copy of the applicant’s discharge package is not available; therefore, the exact circumstances that precipitated the applicant’s discharge could not be verified. On 27 Jun 14, a request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit C). 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 an error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of this case; however, we find no evidence or an error or injustice that occurred during the discharge processing. We note the applicant’s military personnel records do not include a copy of the discharge package for our review. Therefore, the facts surrounding his separation and character of service could not be verified. However, based on the presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs, absent evidence to the contrary, we must assume that his discharge, to include his service characterization and narrative reason for separation, were proper and in compliance with the directive under which it was effected. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge on the basis of clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient for us to recommend granting the relief sought on that basis at this time. In this respect, we note that Congress' intent in setting up the Veterans Benefits Program was to express thanks for Veterans' personal sacrifice, separations from family, facing hostile enemy action, and suffering financial hardship. It would be unfair to all those who served honorably to extend those Veterans benefits to someone who committed acts of misconduct while on active duty. For these reasons, this Board very carefully weighs requests to upgrade the character of a discharge and, in doing so, carefully considers whether the impact of an applicant's contributions to his or her community since leaving the service are substantial enough for us to conclude they overcome the misconduct which precipitated the discharge, and whether or not an upgrade of the discharge would create a larger injustice to those who served under honorable conditions and earned the characterization of service the applicant seeks. While the applicant has provided a single supporting statement and copies of records related to his academic accomplishments, we do not find this documentation sufficient for us to conclude that the impact of his activities since leaving the service on his community are sufficient to overcome the misconduct for which he was discharged. Additionally, a key component of this determination is whether or not an applicant has a criminal record. Without an arrest record from the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI), we cannot conclusively determine if his activities since leaving the service outweigh the misconduct which precipitated his discharge. Therefore, in view of the above, we are unable to recommend granting relief at this time. However, should the applicant provide evidence related to his involvement in the community and an FBI arrest record, we would be willing to reconsider his request based on new evidence. Therefore, in view of the above, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. 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-2013-05360 in Executive Session on 23 Sep 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 11 Nov 11, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Jun 14.