RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 				DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-00238

						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO 



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to 
honorable.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He made a poor choice over 44 years ago.  He has since lived in 
accordance with all laws.  He is not requesting an upgrade for the 
benefits, but to spare his family.

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 2 April 1970, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force.

On 26 September 1972, the applicant’s commander notified him that 
he was recommending he be discharged under the provisions of AFM 
39-12, Separation for Unsuitability, Unfitness, Misconduct, 
Resignation, or Request for Discharge for the Good of the Service 
and Procedures for the Rehabilitation Program.  The specific 
reason for this action was his conviction for importation of 
marijuana.

On 27 September 1972, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the 
discharge notification and on 2 October 1972 submitted a statement 
in his behalf.

On 10 November 1972, the Staff Judge Advocate found the discharge 
legally sufficient.

On 8 December 1972, the discharge authority directed the applicant 
be discharged from the Air Force with a general (under honorable 
conditions) discharge.

On 8 December 1972, the applicant was discharged from the Air 
Force with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge.  He 
served on active duty for 2 years, 10 months and 6 days.

On 24 February 2015, 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, in the absence of any evidence related to the applicant’s 
post-service activities, there is no way for us to determine if 
the applicant’s accomplishments since leaving the service warrant 
such an action.  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 members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number 
BC-2015-00238 in Executive Session on 1 September 2015, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      , Panel Chair
      , Member
      , Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 19 January 2015, w/atch.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 February 2015, w/atch.