RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  01-01800
		INDEX CODE:  110.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He is not guilty of the charges for which he was court-martialed and he has tried for 30 years to get his discharge upgraded.  He also states that he has never seen the evidence that the Air Force said belongs to him.  He further states that the investigation that was being conducted was not aimed at him.  He was asked to give information on other airmen which he had no knowledge of and was therefore, threatened with long jail time.

Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant's military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFLSA/JAJM states that the record of trial indicates another airman provided a statement to the Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI) implicating several airmen, including the applicant, in the wrongful use of marijuana.  Applicant was subsequently interviewed by AFOSI and confessed to using marijuana.  On 25 July 1967, he  provided a sworn written statement to AFOSI stating he had used marijuana on two separate occasions in late May or early June 1967 with another airman in his barracks at Laredo AFB, TX.  He consented to a search of his dorm room.  During the search, the AFOSI confiscated two burned, hand-rolled joints found between the pages of a green book in the applicant’s locked personal locker.  The butts tested positive for the presence of marijuana.  The applicant was represented by defense counsel at trial.  The applicant pled guilty to all charges and specifications and the evidence supported the plea of guilty.

They state the applicant’s drug use was inconsistent with the good order and discipline essential to the successful performance of the Air Force mission.  His prior good service neither negates nor mitigates the extent to which the applicant’s military service failed to meet the standard of conduct demanded of every military member.

Given the serious nature of the offense involved—use of marijuana---a court-martial was an appropriate forum to address the misconduct.  The court-martial sentence was less than the maximum authorized for the offense committed.  The findings of guilty and the approved sentence were affirmed during a subsequent review by a judge advocate pursuant to Article 69(a).  A review of the record of trial does not indicate any basis for action.

They state the applicant has failed to allege any injustice or error requiring relief as to the court-martial and no further action in that regard should be taken.  Therefore, they defer to personnel for appropriate action on the discharge and restrict their opinion to review of the military justice action.

A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

_______________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 25 January 2002, a complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant for review and response within 30 days.  As of this date, no response has been received.

_________________________________________________________________

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.  We find no impropriety in the characterization of applicant’s discharge.  It appears that responsible officials applied appropriate standards in effecting the separation, and we do not find persuasive evidence that pertinent regulations were violated or that applicant was not afforded all the rights to which entitled at the time of discharge.  We conclude, therefore, that the discharge proceedings were proper and characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing circumstances.

4.	The only other basis to warrant an upgrade of his discharge would be on clemency.  However, after reviewing his overall service record and the documentation pertaining to his post-service conduct, we do not believe an upgrade is justified based on clemency.

5.	The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issue(s) involved.  Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

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 this application in Executive Session on 20 March 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

				Panel Chair
				Member
				Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 25 Jun 01, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.	Letter, AFLSA/JAJM, dated 14 Nov 01.
	Exhibit D.	Letter, AFBCMR, dated 25 Jan 02.