RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01070
            INDEX CODE 110.00
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general discharge be upgraded to honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The characterization of his discharge is hindering his  promotions  and  the
ability to be considered for new positions.

The applicant states that although all employers perform drug tests,  he  is
unable to even get to that point due to the past  incident  leading  to  his
discharge.  Since the incident occurred such  a  long  time  ago  (i.e.,  16
years), he requests that he be allowed to put this behind him.  His  records
from the Regular Air Force and Arizona Air National Guard (ANG) show him  to
be worthy and that he has been dedicated in his civilian life.   Other  than
this one incident, he has a spotless record.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 5 July 1984 for a  period
of four years and entered active duty.

The applicant submitted a urine sample during a squadron  inspection  on  19
February 1986, which tested positive for marijuana.

On 1 April 1986, the applicant’s commander notified him  of  his  intent  to
impose nonjudicial punishment under  Article  15  of  the  Uniform  Code  of
Military Justice (UCMJ) for violation of Article  112a.   Specifically,  for
wrongfully using marijuana within North America, between about  12  February
1986 and 19 February 1986.  After consulting counsel, the  applicant  waived
his  right  to  a  trial  by  court-martial  and  accepted  the  nonjudicial
proceedings.  The commander considered  the  applicant’s  oral  and  written
presentations and determined that he  did  commit  to  alleged  offense  and
imposed punishment.  The punishment consisted of reduction to the  grade  of
airman basic and forfeiture of $150.00 pay per month for  two  months.   The
applicant did not appeal the punishment.

The applicant’s commander notified him on 17 April 1986  of  his  intent  to
recommend his discharged for misconduct - drug abuse,  based  on  his  urine
sample that  tested  positive  for  marijuana  on  19  February  1986.   The
applicant did not submit a rebuttal to the discharge action, and  on  1  May
1988, the discharge authority approved the recommended discharge.

The applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFR  39-10  (Misconduct
- Drug Abuse),  with  service  characterized  as  general  (under  honorable
conditions).  He was issued a Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of 2B.   He
completed 1 year, 10 months, and 1 days of active service,  and  10  months,
and 19 days of inactive service.

Applicant submitted a similar request to  the  Air  Force  Discharge  Review
Board (AFDRB); however, since his discharge occurred over 15 years ago,  his
request was returned without  action  and  he  was  advised  to  submit  his
current appeal to the Board.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied and states,  in  part,  that
the  discharge  was  consistent  with   the   procedural   and   substantive
requirements of the discharge regulation.  In addition,  the  discharge  was
within the sound discretion of the discharge authority.  The  applicant  did
not submit any new evidence  of  identify  any  errors  or  injustices  that
occurred in the discharge processing, and provided no  facts  warranting  an
upgrade of his discharge.

The AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to  the  applicant
on 24 May 2002 for review and response within 30 days.  However, 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 the failure to timely file.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of probable error or injustice.  After  thoroughly  reviewing  the
evidence of record and noting the applicant’s complete submission,  we  find
no evidence of error or injustice.   In  this  respect,  we  note  that  the
applicant’s discharge appears to be in compliance  with  the  governing  Air
Force Regulation in effect  at  the  time  of  his  separation  and  he  was
afforded all the rights to which entitled.  The applicant  has  provided  no
evidence to indicate that his  separation  was  inappropriate.  There  being
insufficient evidence to the  contrary,  we  find  no  compelling  basis  to
recommend granting the relief sought.

4.  We also find insufficient evidence to warrant a recommendation that  the
discharge be upgraded on the basis of  clemency.   We  have  considered  the
applicant's overall quality of service, the events  which  precipitated  the
discharge, and available evidence related  to  his  post-service  activities
and accomplishments.  On  balance,  we  do  not  believe  that  clemency  is
warranted.

_________________________________________________________________

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  02-01070  in
Executive Session on 25 June 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                       Ms. Peggy E. Gordon, Panel Chair
                       Mr. Billy C. Baxter, Member
                       Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Member





The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 1 May 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 16 May 02.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 May 02.




                                   PEGGY E. GORDON
                                   Panel Chair