RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBERS:  BC-2004-02034
		INDEX CODE 106.00
	 	COUNSEL:  None

	 	HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His 1989 general discharge be upgraded to honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The discharge is unjust because of inappropriate and illegal conduct by the Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI) (such as coercion of statements, scare tactics, and threats), lack of solid evidence, and drug-free urine samples for three years.  He has been unable to retrieve OSI documents concerning interviews at Dyess AFB, TX.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. 

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 17 Nov 86 and was assigned to the 463rd Organizational Maintenance Squadron at Dyess AFB, TX.  He was promoted to the grade of airman first class on 3 Jan 87.

The applicant received a Letter of Counseling (LOC) on 4 May 87 for being apprehended by the Abilene Police on 2 May 87 at 2233 hours as a minor in possession.  He received another LOC on 25 Aug 97 for lack of initiative in performing his assigned tasks. 

The applicant’s Airman Performance Report (APR) for the period closing 16 Nov 87 gave him an overall rating of 8 out of 9.  The rater also commented the applicant completely reversed his attitude towards the job after being counseled on numerous occasions and receiving an LOC on his lack of initiative and self-motivation.  The APR for the period ending 16 Nov 88 had an overall rating of 9.

According to an AFOSI Report of Investigation (ROI), dated 3 Mar 89, an investigation was conducted around the period of 23 Jan - 7 Feb 89.  Three airmen first class, who were also investigated by the OSI, provided statements indicating they had either smoked marijuana with the applicant, or observed the applicant smoking marijuana, on several occasions.  Apparently, two other squadron members [no further details] also confirmed the applicant used marijuana. After being advised of his rights on 2 Feb 89, the applicant provided a statement admitting to marijuana use about 15-20 times, beginning in the fall of 1988.  He purchased marijuana from a civilian.  He indicated he used it to relieve tension caused by his and his parents’ divorces.  He added he knew this was not the answer and wanted to redeem himself.  The applicant consented to a urinalysis on 2 Feb 89.  

On 28 Feb 89, the commander imposed Article 15 punishment in the form of reduction from airman first class to airman for wrongful use of marijuana on diverse occasions between, on or about 7 Dec 88 and 2 Feb 89.  The applicant made a personal appearance but did not present written materials, and did not appeal the punishment.  

The urinalysis results returned on 2 Mar 89 and showed a negative presence of [marijuana].

On 6 Mar 89, the commander notified the applicant of his intent to recommend separation with a general discharge based on the Article 15.  The applicant acknowledged receipt and the commander subsequently recommended the applicant for a general discharge on 6 Mar 89.  The commander did not recommend probation and rehabilitation (P&R).  The applicant consulted counsel but waived his right to submit statements.

Legal review on 8 Mar 89 found the case sufficient for discharge and the discharge authority subsequently directed the applicant’s general discharge for drug use.  On 9 Mar 89, the applicant was separated with a general discharge for misconduct--drug abuse after 2 years, 3 months and 23 days of active service.

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

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS found the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation, and within the discharge authority’s discretion.  The applicant has not substantiated any errors or injustices and his appeal should be denied.

A complete copy of the evaluation is 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 Jul 04 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this office has received no response.

On 9 Sep 04, a copy of the FBI report was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 14 days.  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.	Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.  After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded his general discharge should be upgraded.  We find no impropriety in the characterization of his discharge and responsible officials apparently applied appropriate standards in effecting the separation.  Further, the applicant has provided no persuasive evidence supporting his allegations that his rights were denied, pertinent regulations were violated, or illegal actions or coercion occurred.  We therefore conclude the discharge’s proceedings and characterization were proper and appropriate to the existing circumstances.  In addition, based on the FBI report, the applicant continued his misbehavior after his discharge rather than becoming a law-abiding and productive citizen.  In view of the above and absent persuasive evidence to the contrary, we agree with the Air Force that the applicant has not established he was the victim of an error or injustice and his case should be denied. 

_________________________________________________________________

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 this application in Executive Session on 4 November 2004 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2004-02034 was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 23 Jun 04.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  FBI Report
   Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 12 Jul 04
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 16 Jul 04.
   Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 9 Sep 04.