RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-01022
		INDEX CODE:  110.00
	.	
		COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  16 SEPTEMBER 2008

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was under the impression that after six months your discharge was upgraded.

The Board should consider his application because he is still aiming high.

In support of his appeal, applicant provides various documents pertaining to his discharge.

The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 27 Apr 00, in the grade of airman basic, for a period of six years.

On 16 Nov 01, applicant received an Article 15 for wrongful use of marijuana.  Punishment consisted of reduction in grade to airman basic.

On 6 Dec 01, the squadron commander notified the applicant that he was recommending he be discharged from the Air Force for misconduct, specifically drug abuse.  The commander was recommending the applicant receive an under honorable conditions (general) discharge based on an Article 15 he received for wrongful use of marijuana.

Applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge and submitted statements in his own behalf.  The Staff Judge Advocate reviewed the case file and found it legally sufficient to support discharge and recommended an under honorable conditions (general) discharge without probation and rehabilitation.  The discharge authority approved the separation and directed an under honorable conditions (general) discharge without probation and rehabilitation.  

On 21 Dec 01, applicant was discharged in the grade of airman basic, under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, by reason of misconduct, with service characterized as under honorable conditions (general).  He was credited with 1 year, 7 months, and 25 days of active military service.

On 8 Apr 03, applicant applied to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) requesting his discharge be upgraded to honorable.  After review of the evidence of record, the AFDRB concluded that no change in his discharge was warranted.  

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied, and states, in part, 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.

Applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.  He provided no facts warranting a change to his under honorable conditions (general) discharge.

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 4 May 07 for review and comment within 30 days.  To date, a response has not been received.

_________________________________________________________________

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.  We find no impropriety in the characterization of applicant's discharge.  It appears that responsible officials applied appropriate standards in effecting the separation, and we do not find persuasive evidence that pertinent regulations were violated or that applicant was not afforded all the rights to which entitled at the time of discharge.  We conclude, therefore, that the discharge proceedings were proper and characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing circumstances.  We also find insufficient evidence to warrant a recommendation that the discharge be upgraded on the basis of clemency.  The applicant has not provided sufficient information of post-service activities and accomplishments for us to conclude that his discharge should be upgraded based on clemency.  Should applicant provide statements from community leaders and acquaintances attesting to applicant's good character and reputation and other evidence of successful post-service rehabilitation, this Board will reconsider this case based on the new evidence.  We cannot, however, recommend approval based on the current evidence of record.  In view of the above we find no basis to warrant favorable action on 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 Docket Number    BC-2007-01022 in Executive Session on 28 June 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	XXXXXXXXXX, Panel Chair
	XXXXXXXXXX, Member
	XXXXXXXXXX, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number BC-2007-01022 was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 29 Mar 07, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 11 Apr 07.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 May 07.

								XXXXXXXXXX
								Panel Chair