RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  99-01875

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  YES



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.    The Article 15, imposed on 4 March 1983, be removed from his records.

2.     The  Airman  Performance  Report  (APR)  rendered  for   the   period
26 January 1983 through 26 August 1983, be removed from his records.

3.    His Weighted Airman Promotion System (WAPS) test scores  be  used  for
supplemental promotion consideration during the appropriate testing cycles.

4.    His date of rank (DOR) for promotion to  the  grade  of  airman  first
class (E-3) be adjusted to 5 October 1982.

5.    He receive back pay in the grade of E-3 for the  period  4 March  1983
to 4 September 1983.

6.    His DOR for promotion to the grade of senior airman (E-4) be  adjusted
to 5 October 1984.

7.    He receive back pay in the grade of E-4  for  the  period  4 September
1984 to 4 August 1985.

8.     His  record  receive  a  complete  review   to   determine   possible
supplemental promotion action beginning with cycle 85E5A.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Since the positive urinalysis test results which gave rise  to  the  Article
15 were set aside for failing to meet new  forensic  confirmation  criteria,
the Article 15 should be removed from his records.

In support of the appeal, applicant submits a statement from the  Commander,
Pacific Air Forces indicating that since the urinalysis  test  results  have
been set aside, the Article  15  should  be  removed  from  the  applicant’s
records.

The applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The relevant facts  pertaining  to  this  application,  extracted  from  the
applicant's military records, are contained in the letters prepared  by  the
appropriate offices of the Air Force.  Accordingly,  there  is  no  need  to
recite these facts in this Record of Proceedings.


AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

The Associate Chief, Military Justice  Division,  AFLSA/JAJM,  reviewed  the
application and states that more  than  14  years  have  elapsed  since  the
applicant was notified of the set aside  of  his  positive  urinalysis  test
results and since he claims to have submitted an application to  the  AFBCMR
seeking correction of his military records.  The applicant submitted a  copy
of a DD Form 149, dated 30 July 1985, as evidence of  his  previous  request
for relief.  However, because the form is incomplete, it has no  evidentiary
value.  The application describes neither the relief sought  nor  the  error
or injustice alleged.  It does not reference the set aside of  the  positive
urinalysis  test  result,  nor  does  it  indicate  the  submission  of  any
supporting documentation.  Most importantly, the AFBCMR never  received  the
application.

AFLSA/JAJM states the set aside of the test result does not mandate  removal
of the Article 15, which should only be removed if  the  applicant  was  not
guilty of the offenses.  The applicant does not now, and does not appear  to
have earlier, maintained he was innocent of  the  charged  offenses.   While
the record is unclear as to whether the applicant ever confessed his  guilt,
it does reveal he accepted nonjudicial punishment proceedings  and  accepted
his commander’s findings of guilt and the  punishment  imposed.   Therefore,
they recommend the application be denied.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

The Chief, Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, AFPC/DPPPWB, reviewed  the  application
and states that they defer to the recommendation  of  AFLSA/JAJM  concerning
removal of the Article 15 and AFPC/DPPPAB concerning  removal  of  the  APR.
However, should the Board  approve  applicant’s  request,  his  DOR  to  E-3
should be changed to 5 October 1982 and his DOR to E-4 should be changed  to
5 December 1984.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.

The  Chief,  BCMR  Appeals  and  SSB  Section,  AFPC/DPPPAB,  reviewed   the
application and states that applicant requests the contested APR be  removed
from his records because the result  of  the  positive  urinalysis  was  set
aside.  However, after reviewing the contested  report,  they  do  not  find
that his evaluators mentioned his use or possession of  marijuana.   Rather,
they marked him down in the areas of “Adaptability  to  Military  Life”  and
“Bearing and Behavior.”  They  also  mentioned  he  had  occasionally  acted
contrary to acceptable Air Force standards and had been  formally  counseled
regarding his weaknesses.

AFPC/DPPPAB  states  that  the  applicant  has   failed   to   provide   any
information/support from the rating chain.  Therefore, they believe the  APR
is accurate and would  be  opposed  to  the  Board  removing  it  since  the
applicant’s use and possession of marijuana is not mentioned on the APR.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit E.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluations  and  states  that  at  the
time he was offered the Article 15, he was told that if he  did  not  accept
it, he would be court-martialed.  He trusted his leadership at the time  and
accepted the nonjudicial  punishment.   However,  he  did  not  realize  the
ramifications.  These included  reduction  in  grade;  restricted  from  the
flight line;  mandatory  rehabilitation  seminar;  mandatory  mental  health
group therapy; assignment cancellation; new Air  Force  Good  Conduct  Medal
start date; no decoration consideration upon reassignment;  restricted  from
leave; 7 days of extra duty; placement on the Control Roster; and  rendering
him non-competitive for promotion.

The applicant’s complete responses, with attachments, are at Exhibits  G,  H
and I.


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 probable error or injustice to warrant  removing  the  positive
urinalysis for THC, the  Article  15  imposed  on  4  March  1983,  and  the
contested APR from the  applicant’s  records,  and  adjusting  his  DOR  and
effective date of promotion to the grade of  senior  airman  to  5  December
1984.  Since the positive urinalysis for THC for a  specimen  the  applicant
provided during the period April 1982 to October 1983 has  been  set  aside,
it may not serve a valid basis for any  adverse  action.   Since  the  cited
urinalysis was the sole reasons for the Article 15 and  contested  APR,  the
applicant’s records should be corrected to the extent indicated below.

4.     The  Board  also  considered  applicant’s  request  for  supplemental
promotion consideration to the grade of staff sergeant beginning with  cycle
85E5A; however, based on the recommended corrections  to  his  records,  the
earliest he would  have  been  eligible  for  promotion  consideration  were
cycles 86A5 and 86B5.  The Chief,  Inquiries/AFBCMR  Section  has  indicated
that a  review  of  applicant’s  promotion  considerations  reveal  that  an
earlier DOR to senior airman, or the removal of the contested APR would  not
have resulted in an earlier selection to either  staff  sergeant,  technical
sergeant, or master sergeant as his total promotion  score  would  not  have
increased sufficiently to meet the cutoff score required  for  selection  in
his Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC).  Therefore, in the absence of  evidence
to the contrary, we find no compelling  basis  to  recommend  granting  this
portion of his application.

5.    The applicant's case is adequately documented  and  it  has  not  been
shown that a personal appearance with or  without  counsel  will  materially
add to our understanding of the issue(s) involved.  Therefore,  the  request
for a hearing is not favorably considered.


THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air  Force  relating
to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that:

      a.    All documents and references to the positive urinalysis for  THC
for a specimen he provided during the period April 1982 to October  1983  be
declared void and removed from his records.

      b.    The nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, UCMJ, initiated  on
17 February 1983 and imposed on 4 March 1983, be declared void  and  removed
from his records, and all rights, privileges and property of  which  he  may
have been deprived be restored.

      c.    The AF Form 909, Airman Performance  Report,  rendered  for  the
period 26 January 1983 through 26 August 1983, be declared void and  removed
from his records.



      d.    He was promoted to the grade of senior  airman  (E-4)  effective
and with date of rank of 5 December 1984, rather than 4 September 1985.


The following members of the Board considered this application in  Executive
Session on 19 September and 14 December 2000, under the  provisions  of  AFI
36-2603:

                  Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Panel Chair
                  Mr. Gregory H. Petkoff, Member
                  Mr. Edward C. Parker, Member

All members voted to correct the  record,  as  recommended.   The  following
documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 Jul 99, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/JAJM, dated 9 Aug 99.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 13 Aug 99.
      Exhibit E.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPAB, dated 3 Sep 99.
      Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 17 Sep 99.
      Exhibit G.  Letter, Applicant, dated  15 Oct 99, w/atchs.
      Exhibit H.  Letter, Applicant, dated 21 Jul 00, w/atchs.
      Exhibit I.  Letter, Applicant, dated 2 Aug 00, w/atchs.




             THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                  Panel Chair


AFBCMR 99-01875




MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

      Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force
Board for 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 APPLICANT, be corrected to show that:

            a.   All documents and references to the positive urinalysis
for THC for a specimen he provided during the period April 1982 to October
1983 be, and hereby is, declared void and removed from his records.

            b.   The nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, UCMJ,
initiated on 17 February 1983 and imposed on 4 March 1983, be, and hereby
is, declared void and removed from his records, and all rights, privileges
and property of which he may have been deprived be restored.

            c.   The AF Form 909, Airman Performance Report, rendered for
the period 26 January 1983 through 26 August 1983, be, and hereby is,
declared void and removed from his records.

            d.   He was promoted to the grade of senior airman (E-4)
effective and with date of rank of 5 December 1984, rather than 4 September
1985.





                                        JOE G. LINEBERGER
                                        Director
                                        Air Force Review Boards Agency