RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-02029

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO 


________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to Honorable. 

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He as wrongly accused of illegal drug use.  As a young Air Force Dentist he made a mistake in the first months of military service by socializing with enlisted airmen.  At no time did he use, possess, or in any way involve himself in illegal drugs or activities.  He was accused by one enlisted airman who had been arrested on illegal drug charges.  His accusations were proven false by other witnesses present.  In the more than 28 years since his discharge he has lived a law abiding, honorable personal and professional life and maintained an excellent reputation as a family dentist.  His skills and services to his community, the poor and those in need are well known.  He asks for mercy and forgiveness.  

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially joined the Air Force Reserve on 23 Apr 82 and served in the grade of captain (O-3) as a dentist.

On 15 Nov 84, the applicant was furnished a UOTHC discharge with a narrative reason of separation of “Voluntary resignation—conduct triable by or in lieu of a court-martial,” and was credited with 2 years, 6 months, and 23 days of active service.  

On 7 Jan 14, a request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days.  The applicant replied by providing a number of character references and letters of recommendation, as well as a copy of his resume for the Board’s use in considering his request for clemency (Exhibit C).

________________________________________________________________

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.  At the outset, we note the applicant’s military personnel records do not contain a copy of the discharge package.  Therefore, the facts surrounding his separation and character of service could not be verified.  However, based on the presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs, in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, we must assume that his discharge and service characterization were proper and in compliance with the directive under which it was effected.  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 regulations, unduly harsh, or disproportionate to the offense committed.  In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge on the basis of clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient for us to recommend granting the relief sought on that basis at this time.  In this respect, we note that Congress' intent in setting up the Veterans Benefits Program was to express thanks for Veterans' personal sacrifice, separations from family, facing hostile enemy action, and suffering financial hardship.  It would be unfair to all those who served honorably to extend those Veterans benefits to someone who committed acts of misconduct while on active duty.  For these reasons, this Board very carefully weighs requests to upgrade the character of a discharge and, in doing so, carefully considers whether the impact of an applicant's contributions to his or her community are substantial enough for us to conclude they overcome the misconduct which precipitated the discharge and whether or not an upgrade of the discharge would create a larger injustice to those who served under honorable conditions and earned the characterization of service the applicant seeks.  A key component of this determination is whether or not an applicant has a criminal record.  While the applicant has provided a number of supporting statements from colleagues attesting to the positive impact of his efforts in the community, without an arrest record from the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI), we cannot conclusively determine if his activities since leaving the service outweigh the misconduct which precipitated his discharge.  Furthermore, without any records pertaining to the misconduct, our ability to compare the merit of his post-service activities against his misconduct is severely compromised.  Therefore, in view of the above, we are unable to recommend granting relief at this time.  However, should the applicant provide an FBI report and/or copies of any records in his possession related to his discharge, we would be willing to reconsider his request based on new evidence.  Therefore, in view of the above, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.    

________________________________________________________________

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-2013-02029 in Executive Session on 27 Feb 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 16 Apr 13.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 7 Jan 14, w/atch.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, Applicant, dated 24 Jan 14, w/atchs.





                                   
                                   Panel Chair