RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  01-01140
		INDEX CODE:  110.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He desires his discharge upgraded.  He indicates that he was not equipped mentally or emotionally to adapt to military life.  Since that time he has turned his life around.  He is a productive member of the community, speaks at prisons and rehabilitation centers to help in the community and is actively involved in church.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 14 April 1972 in the grade of 
had in his possession, 1-gram of marijuana.  He received an Article 15 and received a suspended reduction airman basic for a period of four years.

On 14 October 1972, the applicant wrongfully to airman basic and was fined $150.

Applicant was discharged on 5 July 1973, in the grade of airman with an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge, under the provisions AFM 39-12 (for the good of the service).  He served 1 year, 2 months, and 22 days total active duty service.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of investigation, Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided an investigative report, which is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommended the discharge be upgraded to general (under honorable conditions) on the basis of clemency if a check of the Federal Bureau of Investigation files proves negative since the discharge was over 28 years ago and in consideration of the type of offenses.  They indicate that based upon the documentation in the file, they believe the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  Additionally, the discharge was within the sound discretion of the discharge authority.  The applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.

The evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 21 December 2001, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and response within thirty (30) days.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office. 

On 18 March 2002, a copy of the FBI Investigation was forwarded to the applicant for review and response within fourteen (14) days.  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 probable error or injustice warranting an upgrade of the applicant’s discharge.  After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record, we are not persuaded that the applicant has been the victim of either an error or an injustice.  The discharge apparently complied with the governing regulation in effect at that time; therefore, we believe his separation was appropriate.  We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, the Board is of the opinion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.

4.	Although the applicant did not specifically request consideration based on clemency, we also find insufficient evidence to warrant a recommendation that the discharge be upgraded on that basis.  Applicant has not provided information of his post-service activities and accomplishments after being provided an opportunity to present such information to the Board.  Therefore, based on the evidence of record, we cannot conclude that clemency is warranted.  Should applicant provide statements from community leaders and acquaintances attesting to his good character and reputation and other evidence of successful post-service rehabilitation, this Board would be willing to review this information for possible reconsideration of this case.  However, we cannot recommend approval based on the current evidence of record.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of probable 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 01-01140 in Executive Session on 18 April 2002 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 24 August 2001, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  FBI Investigation.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 7 December 2001.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 December 2001.

                                   Panel Chair