RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-04523
			COUNSEL:  NONE
			HEARING DESIRED: NO

	 

________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was wrongly advised by the judge advocate officer at his base 
to agree to general discharge due to the lack of legal 
assistance available.  He was not court-martialed nor would he 
have been found guilty of any charge.  He deserves the benefit 
of an honorable discharge.  Several urinalysis tests were taken; 
however, all results came back negative.

The applicant does not provide any supporting documentation.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________
_

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted into the Regular Air Force on 17 Apr 81.  
The applicant was pending trial by court-martial for wrongfully 
using marijuana and lysergic acid diethylamide.  The applicant 
requested discharge in lieu of trail by court-martial.  On 27 
Dec 85, his commander approved his request and he received a 
UOTHC discharge on 14 Jan 86 after serving 4 years, 8 months, 
and 28 days on active duty.

________________________________________________________________
_

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 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 his 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 relating to 
his post-service activities, we find no basis to recommend 
upgrading the characterization of his service on this 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 that the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that 
the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 
that 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-2012-04523 in Executive Session on 18 Jun 13, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 27 Sep 12.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.





                                   
                                   Panel Chair