RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-02795
            INDEX CODE:  110.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His  narrative  reason  for  separation  and  the  separation  authority  be
changed.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was discharged for drug abuse.  He received an  honorable  discharge  and
states that he never used  drugs  during  his  military  career.   His  wife
during the contested time period put marijuana in his food.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

During the time period in question the applicant  enlisted  in  the  Regular
Air Force on 21 May 1982 in the grade of sergeant for a period  of  six  (6)
years.

On 19 May 1986, the applicant was notified  of  his  commander's  intent  to
initiate discharge action against him  for  Misconduct,  Minor  Disciplinary
Infractions and Commission of  a  Serious  Offense,  Drug  Abuse.   Specific
reasons follows:

      On 25 March 1985, the commander received notification that the  member
was delinquent in paying his NCO Club account.

      On 25 March 1985, the member received an ATC  Form  18  for  reporting
late to duty.

      On 25 September 1985, the member received an Administrative  Reprimand
for consuming an alcoholic beverage while on duty.



      On 22 January 1986, the member received  an  Administrative  Reprimand
for not following a prescribed checklist.

      On 12 March  1986,  the  member  submitted  to  a  commander  directed
urinalysis, which tested  positive  for  marijuana.   For  this  offense  he
received an Administrative Reprimand, and was placed on the Control  Roster.


The commander indicated in his  recommendation  for  discharge  action  that
considering the member’s character  of  service  he  did  not  consider  the
urinalysis submitted on 12 March 1986, but based his recommendation that  he
receive a general discharge  on  his  overall  military  record  during  his
current enlistment.  Before  recommending  this  discharge  the  member  was
counseled on  several  occasions  by  his  commander,  first  sergeant,  and
supervisors, with no apparent effect on his conduct.  The commander  further
indicated that he did not recommend probation and  rehabilitation  according
to Chapter 7.  Due to the member’s past and continuing inability to  conform
to established military standards,  probation  and  rehabilitation  was  not
considered appropriate.

On 23 June 1986, the commander changed his recommendation  to  an  honorable
discharge.

On 23 June 1986,  the  applicant  submitted  a  conditional  waiver  of  his
administrative  discharge  board  contingent  upon  receiving  an  honorable
discharge.

On 19 August 1986,  the  discharge  authority  disapproved  the  applicant’s
request for a conditional waiver.

On 19 September 1986, the Administrative  Discharge  Board  recommended  the
applicant be discharged for minor disciplinary  infractions  and  commission
of a serious offense, to wit: drug abuse, pursuant to the provisions of  AFR
39-10, Chapter 5, Section H, paragraphs 5-46 and 5-49c,  with  an  Honorable
Discharge.  They further recommended  that  the  applicant  not  be  offered
rehabilitation opportunities with conditional suspension of  the  discharge.
Probation and rehabilitation were not recommended because the  evidence  and
testimony presented led the Board to conclude that drug abuse did occur  and
said drug abuse was not compatible with continued military service.

On 24 October 1986, the  discharge  authority  concurred  with  the  Board’s
findings  and  ordered  an  honorable  discharge   without   probation   and
rehabilitation.

Applicant was discharged on 27 October 1986, in the grade of staff  sergeant
with an honorable discharge, under the  provisions  AFR  39-10  (Misconduct-
Drug Abuse).  He served 7 years, 6 months and  12  days  total  active  duty
service.

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

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS  recommended  denial.   They  indicated  that  based   upon   the
documentation in the file, they believe the discharge  was  consistent  with
the procedural and substantive requirements  of  the  discharge  regulation.
Additionally, 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  other
facts warranting an upgrade of the discharge.

The evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 4 October 2002, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded  to  the
applicant for review and response within  thirty  (30)  days.   As  of  this
date, no response has been received by this office.

On 7 January 2003, the  Board  staff  requested  post-service  documentation
from the applicant and provided him a copy of the FBI report for review  and
response within thirty (30) 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 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, we are not persuaded that the  applicant  has  been  the
victim of either  an  error  or  an  injustice.   The  discharge  apparently
complied with the governing regulation in effect at  that  time;  therefore,
we  believe  his  separation  was  appropriate.   We  took  notice  of   the
applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case;  however,
the Board is of the opinion that the applicant has not been  the  victim  of
an error or injustice.

_________________________________________________________________

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 AFBCMR Docket  Number  02-2795
in Executive Session on 20 March 2003 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. Joseph G. Diamond, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Mike Novel, Member
                 Ms. Jean A. Reynolds, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 26 July 2002, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  FBI Report.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 27 September 2002.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 October 2002.
   Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 7 January 2003, w/atchs.





                                   JOSEPH G. DIAMOND
                                   Panel Chair