RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-01267
		INDEX CODE:  110.00

	APPLICANT	COUNSEL:  None

	SSN	HEARING DESIRED: No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His bad conduct discharge be upgraded to an honorable conditions discharge.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His discharge should be upgraded because someone of equal rank did not conduct his test.  His specimen was left unattended and the chain of custody was compromised (Exhibit A).

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular  Air Force as an airman on 4 January 1971. 

The applicant's court-martial proceedings were conducted on 28-29 August 1990.  He was charged with violating Article 112a, Uniformed Code of Military Justice (UMCJ), wrongful use of cocaine.  The applicant was found guilty of wrongful use of cocaine.  He was sentenced to a bad conduct discharge, six months confinement, total forfeitures, and reduction to airman basic.

The Air Force Court of Military Review affirmed the findings and sentence on 11 June 1992.  On 31 May 1994, the U. S. Court of Military Appeals affirmed the findings and sentence.  The U. S. Supreme Court denied the applicant's application for writ of certiorari on 9 January 1995.  On 17 March 1995, the final court-martial order was issued directing the applicant's bad conduct discharge be executed.  He was discharged on 23 June 1995.

The remaining 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 applicant was court-martialed for wrongful use of cocaine.  The applicant stated during his court-martial that he was unaware the he had ingested cocaine.  The government's expert witness contradicted the applicant's testimony by stating if the applicant had ingested the cocaine as he claimed, it would have been a near fatal dosage with side effects, which the applicant had none.  The applicant was represented by legal counsel at his court-martial and his court-martial proceedings were conducted in accordance to the appropriate rules and regulations.

The applicant now alleges that his monitor for the testing was not of equal rank and that the system failed him because his specimen was left unattended.  The applicant has not provided sufficient persuasive evidence to support his allegations.  Therefore, based on the evidence and records provided JAJM recommends the applicant's request be denied.

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 9 August 2002, for review and response.  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 error or injustice.  After careful consideration of the circumstances of this case and the evidence provided by the applicant, we are not persuaded that the discharge he received was in error or unjust.  Applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

_________________________________________________________________

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  Docket Number 02-01267 in Executive Session on 17 September 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 6 Mar 02, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFLSA/JAJM, dated 29 Jul 02.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Aug 02.