RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-00935

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He feels compassion was not used during his discharge, nor any understanding for the situation he was involved in.  He feels as well that time is a factor--enough time has passed.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force as an airman basic on 17 October 1985. On 15 January 1988, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-10 (Misconduct-Drug Abuse), with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions) in the grade of airman first class. He served 2 years, 2 months and 29 days of total active military service.

On 21 October 1987, applicant's commander recommended discharge for drug abuse.  The basis for the recommendation was on 26 May 1987, applicant provided a urine sample, which tested positive for marijuana.

Applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge on 21 October 1987 and understood if the recommendation for discharge was approved, he could receive a general (under honorable conditions) discharge.  He also acknowledged that legal counsel had been made available to assist him. On 10 December 1987, applicant submitted a conditional waiver of the rights associated with an administrative discharge board hearing.  His request was contingent on him receiving no less than a general (under honorable conditions) discharge.  

The base legal office reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient to support discharge and recommended the conditional waiver be accepted and applicant be separated from the Air Force with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge without probation and rehabilitation.  

The commander reviewed the case file along with the recommendation from the base legal office and sent the case to 23rd Air Force Commander recommending he accept the conditional waiver and separate applicant with an general (under honorable conditions) discharge without probation and rehabilitation.

Headquarters 23rd Air Force legal office reviewed the case file and found it legally sufficient to support discharge.  They recommended the conditional waiver be accepted and applicant be separated with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge without probation and rehabilitation. 

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

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial.  They state that based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  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 a change to his character of service. 

AFPC/DPPRS complete evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 16 April 2004, for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.  The FBI Report was forwarded to the applicant on 7 May 2004 for review and comment within 15 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 that failure to timely file.

3.	Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.  After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his discharge should be upgraded to honorable.  The applicant has not established by his submission that the discharge was not consistent with procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulations or that it was not within the sound discretion of the discharge authority.  Therefore, we agree with the opinions and recommendation of the Air Force and adopt their rationale as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of having suffered either an error or an injustice.   Therefore, in absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought.

4.	The documentation provided with this case was sufficient to give the Board a clear understanding of the issues involved and a personal appearance, with or without legal counsel, would not have materially added to that understanding.  Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of probable 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 BC-2004-00935 in Executive Session on 30 June 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 14 Jun 03, w/atch.
	Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.	FBI Report, dated 23 Apr 04.
	Exhibit D.	Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 9 Apr 04.
	Exhibit E.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 16 Apr 04.