RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04102 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be 
upgraded to an honorable discharge. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

His discharge was too harsh for the one incident of misconduct. 
His years of good service prior to his misconduct should have 
been considered in determining the characterization of his 
discharge. He underwent rehabilitation therapy for the drugs and 
did well, but was not allowed the opportunity to show the therapy 
was successful. Although, he agreed to the UOTHC discharge, he 
did not realize the full impact it would have on his life. 

 

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a copy of the DD 
Form 293, Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed 
Forces of the United States. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 20 Apr 89, the applicant contracted his enlistment in the 
Regular Air Force. He was progressively promoted to the grade of 
senior airman, having assumed the grade effective and with a date 
of rank of 20 Apr 92. He served as a cardiopulmonary lab 
specialist. 

 

On 21 Jan 93, the applicant underwent a random urinalysis. On 
10 Feb 93, the sample tested positive for marijuana. On 17 Feb 
93, the applicant voluntarily provided another urine sample, and 
this sample also tested positive for marijuana. Court-martial 
charges were preferred and on 23 Apr 93 the applicant requested 
to be discharged in lieu of trial by court-martial. 

 


On 27 Apr 93, the commander recommended the request for discharge 
in lieu of trial by court-martial be approved and the applicant 
be furnished a UOTHC discharge. 

 

On 29 Apr 93, the legal office reviewed the case and found it 
legally sufficient to support separation and recommended 
discharge with a UOTHC discharge. 

 

On 4 May 93, the discharge authority directed the applicant be 
furnished a UOTHC discharge. He was discharged on 24 May 93. He 
was credited with four years, one month, and five days of active 
service. 

 

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation (FBI) provided a copy of an Investigative Report, 
which is at Exhibit C. 

 

On 15 Feb 12, a copy of the FBI Investigative Report was 
forwarded to the applicant along with a request for post-service 
documentation for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). 
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. We considered 
upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not 
find the evidence presented is sufficient to compel us to 
recommend granting the relief sought on that basis. Therefore, 
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-2011-04102 in Executive Session on 24 May 12, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 13 Oct 11, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Military Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. FBI Investigative Report. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 15 Feb 12, w/atchs. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair