RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02218

			COUNSEL:  NONE

			HEARING DESIRED:  NO 


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general under honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to 
honorable.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

In 1978, he was cited for possession of marijuana “residue” in 
his car while returning from a night out with fellow airmen.  
His First Sergeant was notified and to his knowledge, no action 
was taken for a couple of months.  He had planned on not 
reenlisting and when offered a general under honorable 
conditions discharge, he accepted.  

On 3 Jan 14, after having served for more than 34 years as a 
federal civil servant, he retired.  He is trying to become a 
member of USAA and is not able to do so with anything except an 
honorable discharge.  The board should find it in the interest 
of justice to consider his untimely request so he may be able to 
get the insurance coverage he desires.  

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit A.


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 22 Aug 75, the applicant entered the Regular Air Force.  

On 19 Nov 78, according to DD Form 1569, Incident/Complaint 
Report, the local county jailer telephone the base security 
police to notify them of the applicant’s off base arrest for 
possession of a controlled substance, speeding and having no 
driver’s license.  

On 30 Nov 78, he pleaded guilty to illegal possession of a 
controlled substance (marijuana), an offense punishable under 
Article 134 of the UCMJ.  

On 12 Jan 79, his squadron commander notified him he was 
recommending him for discharge under provisions of AFM 39-12, 
Separation for Unsuitability, Misconduct, Resignation or Request 
for Discharge for the Good of the Service, chapter 2, section C, 
paragraph 2-23, for his civil court conviction for possession of 
a controlled substance.  The applicant acknowledged receipt the 
same day.  

On 18 Jan 79, he submitted a statement to the approval authority 
offering his conditional waiver of rights associated with an 
administrative discharge board hearing contingent upon him 
receiving a general discharge.

On 5 Feb 79, the Staff Judge Advocate (SJA) found the discharge 
proceedings legally sufficient and recommended the applicant be 
given a general discharge without probation and rehabilitation.

On 12 Feb 79, the approval authority approved his commander’s 
recommendation that he be administratively discharged under the 
provisions of AFM 39-12, section C, chapter 2, paragraph 2-23 
for conviction by civil authorities.  

On 16 Feb 79, the applicant received a general under honorable 
conditions discharge.  He was credited with 3 years, 4 months 
and 25 days of active service.   

On 4 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 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 recommend granting relief on that basis.  
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find 
no basis 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 documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2014-02218 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 20 May 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Clemency Bulletin, dated 4 Jun 14.