RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02892 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to an honorable. 2. His narrative reason for separation (Misconduct – Drug Abuse) be removed and left blank. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Since being discharged from the Air Force he has led a decent life and has remained drug free. He has earned three college degrees and is a respectable member of his community and a responsible taxpayer. The reason for his discharge was a one- time mistake made when he was very young – it shames him to this day. He further states he has a wonderful family, nice home, and a respectable job. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 16 November 1983. The applicant’s commander notified him on 13 June 1985 that he was recommending him for discharge from the Air Force for misconduct - drug abuse with a general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service. The specific reason was on or about 16 April 1985, the applicant did at or near Patrick AFB, FL, wrongfully use marijuana, a scheduled I controlled substance, for which he received non-judicial punishment (NJP) on 6 June 1985. The punishment consisted of a reduction in grade from airman first class to airman, a forfeiture of $75 and 14 days extra duty. The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge and was afforded the opportunity to consult with legal counsel and submit statements in his own behalf. On 18 June 1985, applicant acknowledged notification the he was being recommended for discharge for drug abuse IAW AFR 39-10 and that military legal counsel was available to him. On 19 June 1985, the Commander concurred with the Headquarters Squadron Commander recommendation to discharge the applicant. On 12 July 1985, Commander, 6550 Air Base Group, approved the applicant for discharge with a service characterization of “General.” The applicant was considered not a suitable candidate for probation and rehabilitation. On 17 July 1985, the applicant was furnished a general (under honorable conditions) discharge, and was credited with one year, eight months, and one day of active service. On 6 October 2014, a request for information pertaining to his post-service activities was forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days (Exhibit C). On 4 December 2014, the applicant requested that his case be closed in order to gather additional information. On 20 May 2015, the applicant requested his case be re-opened and provided copies of his FBI Arrest Record in support of his request (Exhibit G). AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial indicating the applicant has not filed a timely petition. There is no evidence of an error or an injustice. IAW AFR 39-l0, paragraph 5-51, drug abuse is “incompatible with military service and airmen who abuse drugs one or more times are subject to discharge for misconduct. Drug abuse for the purpose of this regulation is the illegal, wrongful, or improper use, possession, sale, transfer, or introduction onto a military installation of any drug. This includes improper use of prescription medication. The term drug includes any controlled substance in schedules I, II, III, IV, and V of Title 21 U.S.C., Section 812. It also includes anabolic/androgenic steroids, and any intoxicating substance, other than alcohol, that is inhaled, injected, consumed or introduced into the body in any manner for purposes of altering mood or function. The presence in the military environment of persons who engage in drug abuse seriously impairs accomplishing the military mission. Members who abuse drugs adversely affect the ability of the Air Force to: Maintain discipline, good order, and morale; Foster mutual trust and confidence among members; Facilitate assignments and worldwide deployment; Recruit and retain members; Maintain public acceptability of military service; Prevent breaches of security.” The serious nature of the misconduct was taken into account by the applicant's commander. Based on the applicant’s overall performance in his brief military career, the discharge authority approved an under honorable conditions (general) discharge. According to AFR 39-10, Paragraph l-l 8b, a general discharge is appropriate when “significant negative aspects of the airman’s conduct or performance of duty outweighs positive aspects of the airman's military record.” It has been 29 years since the applicant’s discharge from the Air Force and the applicant did not provide a valid reason why he did not submit a request for correction within three years of the alleged error or injustice. Furthermore, based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge, to include the SPD code, narrative reason for separation and characterization of service, were consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge instruction and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. The applicant did not provide any evidence of an error or injustice that occurred in the discharge processing. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states the facts in the advisory are accurate. In 1985, he failed a drug screening test. This was a one-time mistake made by a 19 year-old. He is very ashamed of his actions; however, he would like his post service contributions to society to be considered when evaluating his case. Since his discharge, he has been continuously employed by many companies, all of which required a pre-employment drug screening - some required random screening during employment. These companies included: Florida Express Airlines, Eaton Corporation, MGM Grand Air, Litton Laser Systems, Lucent Technologies, Agere Systems and Northrop Grumman Corporation. He further states he does not use drugs. The applicant’s response, with attachments is at Exhibit F. 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, to include his rebuttal response, 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 and narrative reason for separation 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 for us to conclude that the applicant’s post-service activities overcome the misconduct for which he was discharged. 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 an 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-2014-02892 in Executive Session on 26 August 2015, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-02892 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 8 July 2014, w/atch. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 October 2014. Exhibit D. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 26 August 2014. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 October 2014. Exhibit F. Letter, Applicant, dated 5 November 2014, w/atchs. Exhibit G. Letter, Applicant, dated 20 May 2015, w/atchs.