RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-02024
					INDEX CODE:  110.00

					COUNSEL: None

					HEARING DESIRED: No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He should have a honorable discharge.  He was told by the Air Force that his discharge would be upgraded to honorable in six months.

Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 2 October 1984 for a period of four (4) years as an airman first class.

On 23 September 1985, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intent to initiate discharge action against him under the provisions of AFR 39-10, paragraph 5-49c-Misconduct-Drug Abuse.  The commander recommended a general (under honorable conditions) discharge.  The reason for the discharge action was:

	On 19 July 1985, at Rhein Mein AB, Germany, the applicant was directed to submit to a urinalysis during a random unit sweep.  On 6 August 1985, the applicant’s urinalysis tested positive for marijuana.

The commander advised the applicant of his right to consult legal counsel and that military legal counsel had been obtained for him; and to submit statements in his own behalf; or waive the above rights after consulting with counsel.

On 9 October 1985, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the letter of notification and invoked his right to submit statements on his behalf.

The commander indicated in his recommendation for discharge that he did not recommend probation and rehabilitation.  He indicated the applicant had been verbally counseled numerous times on Air Force policy toward drug use prior to the incident.

A legal review was conducted on 28 October 1985, in which the staff judge advocate recommended the applicant be discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge without probation and rehabilitation.

On 1 November 1985, the discharge authority approved the discharge.

Applicant was discharged on 15 November 1985, in the grade of airman with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge, in accordance  with  AFR 39-10 (Misconduct - Drug Abuse).  He served 1 year, 1 month and 14 days of active service.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Washington, D.C., provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS states the applicant has not submitted any evidence nor identified any errors or injustices that occurred in the processing of his discharge.  Based upon the documentation in the applicant's file, they believe his discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulations of that time.  Also, the discharge was within the sound discretion of the discharge authority.  Therefore, based on the information and evidence provided they recommend the applicant's request be denied.

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

In support of his request to have his discharge upgraded the applicant submitted character letters from his brother and employer (Exhibit H).

_________________________________________________________________

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 of timely file.

3.	Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.  After thoroughly reviewing the evidence or record, we find no evidence to show that the applicant’s discharge was erroneous or unjust.  The applicant’s contention that he was told his discharge would automatically be upgraded after 6 months is duly noted.  However, as noted by the Air Force office of primary responsibility, there are no regulations or directives that allow an automatic upgrade of a discharge.  We have considered the character references provided in support of the applicant’s request; however, the FBI report shows that the applicant was arrested and charged with several offenses since his separation from active duty.  In view of the foregoing, we are not persuaded that an upgrade on the basis of clemency is warranted.  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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2003-02024 in Executive Session on 23 September 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36‑2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 23 Jun 03.
   Exhibit B.  Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  FBI Report
   Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 11 Jul 03.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Jul 03.
   Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 13 Aug 03, w/atch.
   Exhibit G.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 27 Aug 03, w/atch.
   Exhibit H.  Character/Reference Letters, dated 4 & 5 Sep 03.