RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2002-03332
		INDEX CODE:  110.02

	APPLICANT	COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED: NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His General, Under Honorable Conditions, discharge be upgraded to Honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was falsely accused of having possession and using a habit-forming drug that was subsequently proven untrue during his court-martial hearing.  (Exhibit A)

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant contracted his enlistment in the Regular Air Force on  8 June 1950.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of Airman 3rd Class (A/3C) with an effective date and date of rank of 11 March 1952.

On 5 March 1954, the applicant was arraigned and tried by general court-martial for wrongful use of a habit forming narcotic (Morphine) (found not guilty), and forgery and possession of a military pass (found guilty on both counts).  Applicant was reduced in grade to Airman Basic (AB/E-1) and fined $50 per month for three months.  The sentence was adjudged and carried out on  5 March 1954.

The available record reflects applicant’s character and efficiency ratings as excellent on 2 Sep 50, 3 Mar and 12 Mar 51; on 16 Apr 51, excellent character rating and satisfactory efficiency rating; excellent on 15 Aug and 28 Oct 51; unknown on 8 Dec and 21 Dec 51; and on 24 Oct 53, character rating was good and efficiency rating was unsatisfactory.

The specific facts surrounding the applicant’s involuntary separation are not contained in the available records.  His DD Form 214, Report of Separation from the Armed Forces of the United States, reflects that he was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-14 (Convenience of the Government), with a general, under honorable conditions, discharge on 10 May 1954, after serving 3 years, 11 months, and 3 days of active service.  He was discharged in the grade of airman basic.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial noting that the applicant provided no new evidence to support his claim.  Nor did the applicant identify any errors or injustices in the processing of his discharge.  DPPRS states that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and that it was within the discretionary power of the discharge authority.  (Exhibit C)

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 20 December 2002 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, there has been no response received by this office.  (Exhibit D)

_________________________________________________________________

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 applicant’s request and the available evidence of record, we found insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.  Based on the presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs and without evidence to the contrary, we must assume that the applicant’s discharge was proper and in compliance with appropriate directives.  Therefore, we find no basis upon which to favorably consider 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2002-03332 in Executive Session on 4 March 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dtd 21 Nov 02, w/atchs. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dtd 13 Dec 02.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dtd 20 Dec 02, w/atchs.