RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01771
            INDEX CODE:  129.04
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be correct to reflect that he retired in  the  grade  of  master
sergeant (E-7).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was guilty as charged and the punishment he received was warranted.   The
punishment and misery he endured is restitution for making  a  mistake.   He
asks to be reinstated to the grade of master sergeant  because  he  believes
he earned and executed his  duties  in  that  grade  in  a  responsible  and
honorable manner.   He  lost  his  career  and  marriage  for  a  moment  of
stupidity.  After his divorce he was forced to  file  for  bankruptcy.   His
daughter began to lose her hair because  of  the  major  emotional  problems
caused  by  his  confinement.   His  ex-wife  died  in  1998  and  he  feels
responsible because he was told that her illness began around  the  time  of
his court-martial.  It has been hard for him  to  deal  with  the  pain  and
suffering he has cost others over the past ten  years.   Subsequent  to  his
court-martial he lost his mother and brother.  His  brother  blamed  himself
for what had happened to him because he was present when he  puffed  on  the
marijuana that ended his life as he had known it.

He has tried to live every day as the  best  person,  father,  brother,  and
friend that he can.  His life is better now and he is  working  as  an  F-16
crew chief at Edwards AFB.  When he was on active duty  he  tried  to  be  a
responsible  NCO  by  being  respectful  and  caring  of  those  under   his
supervision.  The last decade has reinforced his belief  that  his  devotion
to duty and his military family had an immense impact on how  successful  he
was as a master sergeant.

In  support  of  his  request,  applicant  provided  a  personal  statement,
character references, his retirement orders, and a copy of his DD Form  214.
 His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant contracted his initial enlistment in the Regular Air Force  on  28
Nov 73 and was progressively promoted  to  the  grade  of  master  sergeant,
having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 1 Jun 88.

On 13 Mar 93, applicant was tried by special court-martial after a  positive
urinalysis for the presence of marijuana.  He plead  guilty  and  was  found
guilty of the specification.  Sentence adjudged on 31 Mar 93  was  reduction
to the grade of technical sergeant, forfeiture of $922.00 pay per month  for
three months, and confinement for three months.  On 9 Jul 93, the  Secretary
of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAF/PC) considered the applicant's  case
and determined that the applicant did not serve satisfactorily in the  grade
of master sergeant and did not warrant  advancement  on  the  Retired  list.
Applicant was retired from the Air Force on 28 Feb 94.  He served  20  years
and 20 days on active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFLSA/JAJM recommends the application be denied  as  untimely.   Should  the
Board decide to consider the case on  its  merits,  denial  is  recommended.
JAJM states that at the time of his court-martial the applicant had over  19
years of service.  His service had been exemplary.   During  sentencing  his
supporters provided a number of statements which unequivocally held  him  in
high esteem.  The applicant's sentence was well within the legal limits  and
was an appropriate punishment for  the  offense  committed.   The  applicant
offered mitigating circumstances in his defense  during  his  court-martial.
The adjudged  sentence  indicates  the  members  considered  his  mitigating
factors.

There  is  no  legal  basis  for  upgrading  or  advancing  his  rank.   The
appropriateness of his sentence is a matter within  the  discretion  of  the
court-martial and may be mitigated by the convening authority or within  the
course of the appellate review process.  He had the  assistance  of  counsel
and was afforded all rights granted by statute and regulation.  He  provides
no compelling rationale to mitigate the approved reduction in rank.   While,
clemency is an option,  there  is  no  reason  for  the  Board  to  exercise
clemency in  this  case.   Despite  his  otherwise  exemplary  service,  the
pertinent period of service that would justify the advancement of  rank  did
not conclude honorably.  The  tone  of  his  application  suggests  that  he
acknowledges responsibility, but he has not comprehended the gravity of  his
actions.  He identified no error or injustice related to the prosecution  or
the sentence.

The JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPRRP recommends  denial.   DPPRRP  states  that  in  accordance  with
Section 8691, Title 10, U.S.C., the applicant was correctly retired  in  the
grade of technical sergeant, which was the grade he held on the date of  his
retirement.  The law which allows for advancement of enlisted  members  when
their service plus service on the retired list  totals  30  years,  is  very
specific in its application and intent.  On 9 Jul 93, the  SAF/PC  made  the
determination that the applicant did  not  serve  satisfactorily  on  active
duty in and grade higher than technical  sergeant.   This  determination  is
final for all purposes of law.  All criteria  of  the  pertinent  laws  have
been met in  this  regard  and  no  error  or  injustices  occurred  in  his
retirement, grade determination or advancement action.

The DPPRRP evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the  applicant  on  29
Aug 03 for review and comment within 30 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.  Sufficient relevant evidence  has  been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of an injustice.  There is no error in this case  and  we  do  not
condone the applicant's use of marijuana, which  led  to  his  reduction  in
grade from  master  sergeant  to  technical  sergeant  by  a  special  court
martial.  However, there are mitigating factors within the realm of  equity,
which reach to the injustice aspect of our recommending authority.  In  this
regard we note (1) the applicant's outstanding  record  of  performance  for
over 19 years (2) he plead guilty at his trial and admitted to an  "isolated
instance of stupidity"  (3)  he  could  have  been  reduced  to  the  lowest
enlisted grade and received a Bad Conduct  Discharge  (4)  he  was  severely
punished by receiving a reduction in grade, three  months  confinement,  and
fined $2,766 (5) given a life expectancy of 70  years,  he  stands  to  lose
approximately an additional $35,000, and (6) he is now working  as  an  F-16
crew chief for the Air Force - a job that  obviously  requires  the  highest
moral  standards  and  integrity.   In  view  of  the   foregoing   and   in
consideration of all the circumstances, to  continue  the  punitive  aspects
caused by the reduction in grade beyond the date he accumulates 10 years  on
the Retired list is extremely harsh and therefore unjust.   Accordingly,  we
recommend that his records be corrected to reflect that  when  his  combined
active service time plus time on the Retired list equals 30 years,  he  will
be advanced to the grade of master sergeant.

_______________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

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

a.  Competent authority determined that the highest grade he  satisfactorily
held was the grade of master sergeant.

b.  It is further recommended that when his  combined  active  service  time
plus time on the Retired list equals 30 years, he will be  advanced  to  the
grade of master sergeant.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number  BC-2003-
01771 in Executive Session on 1 Oct 03, under  the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

      Mr. Frederick R. Beaman III, Panel Chair
      Mr. Michael J. Maglio, Member
      Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Member

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

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 20 May 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFLSA/JAJM, not dated.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRRP, dated 21 Aug 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Aug 03.




                             FREDERICK R. BEAMAN III
                                             Panel Chair

AFBCMR BC-2003-01771




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.  On 9 July 1993, competent authority determined that the
highest grade he satisfactorily served on active duty was the grade of
master sergeant.

            b.  When his combined active service time plus time on the
Retired list equals 30 years; he be advanced on the Retired list to the
grade of master sergeant.








  JOE G. LINEBERGER

  Director

  Air Force Review Boards Agency