RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-03279
		INDEX CODE:  110.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge and his narrative reason for separation be changed from Drug Abuse to Time Served.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He desires his discharge upgraded and narrative reason changed.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 11 February 1983 for a period of four (4) years.

On 20 October 1983, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intent to impose nonjudicial punishment upon him for the following:  He did, at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, on or about 14 October 1983, wrongfully possess some amount of marijuana.

After consulting with counsel, applicant waived his right to a trial by court-martial, submitted a written presentation in his behalf and requested to make a personal appearance.  However, he did not desire that it be public.

On 3 November 1983, he was found guilty by his commander who imposed the following punishment: Reduction to the grade of airman basic and a forfeiture of $75.00 per month for two months.  Reduction to the grade of airman basic was suspended until 2 May 1984, at which time it would be remitted without further action unless sooner vacated.

The applicant did not appeal the punishment.  The Article 15 was filed in his Unfavorable Information File (UIF).

On 3 September 1985, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intent to impose nonjudicial punishment upon him for the following:  He did, within the territorial limits of the United States, between 30 April 1985 and 30 May 1985, wrongfully use marijuana, a schedule I controlled substance.

After consulting with counsel, applicant waived his right to a trial by court-martial, he requested to make a personal appearance and desired that it be public.  He did not submit a written presentation in his behalf.

On 9 September 1985, he was found guilty by his commander who imposed the following punishment: Reduction to the grade of airman and 14 days extra duty.

The applicant did not appeal the punishment and the Article 15 was filed in his Unfavorable Information File (UIF).

On 10 September 1985, the applicant was notified of his commander's intent to initiate discharge action against him for Drug Abuse.  Specific reasons are listed above and as follows:

He had not been able to conform to standards of bearing and behavior expected of Air Force members as evidenced by:  On 14 October 1983, he submitted a urine specimen for drug testing which resulted in a positive test for marijuana, as evidenced by USAF Regional Hospital letter, 8 November 1983.  On 20 August 1985, he submitted a urine specimen for drug testing which resulted in a positive test for marijuana, as evidenced by AF Form 2734, 21 August 1985.

The commander indicated in his recommendation for discharge that before recommending the discharge he had given the applicant all opportunity to reform through counseling devices and the drug rehabilitation program.  The commander did not recommend probation and rehabilitation according to chapter 7.  The applicant had not displayed the necessary motivation to succeed in the rehabilitation program.

The commander advised the applicant of his right to consult legal counsel and submit statements in his own behalf, or waive the above rights after consulting with counsel.

After consulting with counsel the applicant waived his right to submit statements in his own behalf.

On 30 September 1985, the Staff Judge Advocate recommended that the applicant be separated with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge without probation and rehabilitation.

On 15 October 1985, the discharge authority approved the discharge.

Applicant was discharged on 27 January 1986, in the grade of airman with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge, under the provisions of AFR 39-10 (Misconduct - Drug Abuse).  He served 2 years, 11 months and 17 days of total active military service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRSP recommended denial.  They indicated 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 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.  He provided no facts warranting an upgrade is his discharge.  He has not filed a timely request.

The evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 31 October 2003, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 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 an error or injustice.  We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; 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.  The applicant has failed to demonstrate that the commander exceeded his authority or that the reason for the discharge was inaccurate or unwarranted.  The Board believes that responsible officials applied appropriate standards in effecting the separation, and the Board does not find persuasive evidence that pertinent regulations were violated or that the applicant was not afforded all the rights to which entitled at the time of discharge.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of an error or an 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-2003-03279 in Executive Session on 22 January 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 6 October 2003, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRSP, dated 21 October 2003,
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 31 October 2003.