RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:				DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-00067
INDEX CODE:  110.02
	XXXXXXXXXXXXXX				COUNSEL:  NONE

	XXXXXXXXXXX					HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

His narrative reason for separation be changed from “misconduct - drug abuse” to “early out.”  

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

There is no evidence of drug abuse in his records or any indication he ever used any illegal substance.  He was coerced into making such a statement due to a tip he gave the Office of Special Investigations that led to a bust not as successful as they desired.  He requests to have the reason for his discharge be changed because he would like to gain employment with the US Agency for International Development.  

In support of his application, he provides a personal statement, a character reference, copy of his resume, a copy of a newspaper article about himself, a letter of commendation, three letters of recommendation, and a copy of his college transcript.  The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 19 October 1989 the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force at the age of 18 in the grade of airman basic (E-1) for a period of four years.  He was trained as a Munitions Systems Specialist.  The applicant was promoted to the grade of airman first class (E-3) effective and with a date of rank of 19 February 1991.  

On 26 February 1991, the applicant turned himself in for treatment and confessed to smoking a controlled substance on two occasions during March 1990.  On 1 May 1991, his commander notified the applicant of his recommendation to discharge the applicant for misconduct - drug abuse.  The applicant acknowledged receipt of the recommendation, consulted counsel and submitted a statement in his own behalf.  On 3 May 1991, the Area Defense Council (ADC) found the case to be legally insufficient because the applicant’s drug abuse was not substantiated.  The ADC stated that the applicant’s declaration of drug use, regardless of how many times, or to whom, was insufficient.  The applicant’s urinalysis came back negative and there was no independent support by any witness.  The ADC’s recommendation was to terminate the applicant’s discharge action.  On 22 May 1991, the applicant’s wing commander concurred with the recommendation for an honorable discharge without probation and rehabilitation.  On 30 May 1991, the applicant received Article 15 punishment for failure to go at the time prescribed to his place of duty.  Punishment consisted of reduction in grade to airman (E-2).  On 17 June 1991, the staff judge advocate found the case to be legally sufficient to discharge the applicant with an honorable characterization of service because the applicant himself provided the sole evidence of drug abuse.  The staff judge advocate also stated that members discharged for drug abuse are not eligible for probation or rehabilitation.  On 24 June 1991, the discharge authority approved the applicant’s honorable discharge, without probation or rehabilitation.  On 11 July 1991, the applicant was honorably discharged with a narrative reason for separation of “misconduct - drug abuse.”  He served 1 year, 8 months and 23 days on active duty.  

On 5 February 1992, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and, by majority vote, disapproved the applicant’s request to change his narrative reason for discharge.  Three board members voted to deny the applicant’s request and two board members voted to change the applicant’s reason for separation to “convenience of the government.”

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  DPPRS states the applicant’s discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation in affect at that time.  Additionally, the discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority.  The applicant did not provide any facts warranting a change in his discharge, nor did he submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in his discharge processing.  The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 13 February 2004, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D).  As of this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

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.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of injustice.  After reviewing all the evidence provided, we see no evidence to show that the applicant’s discharge was erroneous or unjust.  Nevertheless, after reviewing his submission, the Board majority is persuaded that the applicant has provided sufficient evidence to conclude that in the years following his separation, he has made a successful adjustment to civilian life.  This is evident by his accomplishments involving his education, career, and service to his community.  We note the recommendation from the Air Force office of primary responsibility; however, in view of the applicant’s post service record and consideration of his age and immaturity at the time of his discharge, the Board majority believes changing his narrative reason for discharge from “Misconduct - Drug Abuse” to “Secretarial Authority” is warranted.  Therefore, the majority of the Board recommends that his records be corrected as indicated below.

_________________________________________________________________

RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that the narrative reason for separation, issued in conjunction with her honorable discharge on 11 July 1991, was “Directed by Secretary of the Air Force” and the separation program designator (SPD) code was “JFF.” 

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application, AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2004-00067 in Executive Session on 13 April 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36‑2603:

By a majority vote, the Board voted to correct the record as recommended.  Mr. XXXX voted to deny the applicant’s appeal but chose not to submit a minority report.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 22 Dec 03 with attachments.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 5 Feb 04.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 Feb 04.

						
									Panel Chair

AFBCMR BC-2004-00067

MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

	Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board of Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that:

	The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, be corrected to show that on 11 July 1991, he was separated under the provisions of AFR 39-10, paragraph 1-2, (Directed by Secretary of the Air Force) and the separation program designator (SPD) code was “JFF.” 

                                Director
                                Air Force Review Boards Agency