RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-03753
            INDEX CODE:  110.00

            COUNSEL:  THE AMERICAN LEGION

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded  to  general
(under honorable conditions) at a minimum.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

A review of his service records will show the  punishment  he  received  was
not consistent with  the  alleged  offense  (possession,  use  and  sale  of
marijuana).  Air Force legal personnel used fear to force him not  to  fight
the charges.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force  on  4  August  1966  for  a
period of four years.

On  16  September  1969,  after  consulting  with  counsel,  the   applicant
requested to be discharged from the Air Force for the good  of  the  service
and issued a general (under honorable conditions) discharge.   He  indicated
due to the allegation present in his case, he felt  his  commitment  to  the
service was in jeopardy.  Although he had not  yet  been  convicted  of  any
crime, the statements made against him were intolerable.   The  Staff  Judge
Advocate indicated the applicant’s request for discharge statement  was  his
(applicant’s) decision, signed by him  after  he  was  fully  counseled  and
advised of his rights and privileges.




On 18 September 1969, the squadron  commander  recommended  the  applicant’s
request for discharge be approved for the  following  reasons:   possession,
use and sale of marijuana, a violation  of  Article  134,  Uniform  Code  of
Military Justice and that he be furnished an undesirable discharge.

The commander  indicated  in  his  recommendation  for  discharge  that  the
applicant was not considered a good rehabilitation risk, and it  was  deemed
best the applicant be eliminated from the service.

On 30 September  1969,  the  discharge  authority  approved  an  undesirable
discharge.

Applicant was discharged on 3 October 1969, in the grade of sergeant,  under
the provisions of AFM 39-12 (For the Good of  the  Service)  with  an  under
other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge.  He  served  three  years
and two months total active service.

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

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRSP recommended  clemency.   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.
Considering the discharge occurred  over  34  years  ago  and  the  type  of
offense leading to his discharge, they would not  be  opposed  to  upgrading
his discharge to general (under honorable conditions) if  a  search  of  the
FBI files reveals no convictions.  He has not filed a timely request

The evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 19 December 2003, a copy of the Air Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to
the applicant and counsel for review and response within  30  days.   As  of
this date, no response has been received by this office.





On 16 January 2004, the Board staff requested the  applicant  provide  post-
service documentation and provided him the opportunity  to  respond  to  the
FBI report within 14 days.  As of this date, no response has  been  received
by this office (Exhibit F).

_________________________________________________________________

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 an error or injustice warranting an upgrade of the  applicant’s
discharge.  The applicant has  failed  to  demonstrate  that  the  commander
exceeded his authority or that the reason for the discharge  was  inaccurate
or unwarranted.  The  Board  believes  that  responsible  officials  applied
appropriate standards in effecting the separation, and the  Board  does  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.  The Air Force, in their  26 November  2003,  advisory  indicates
since the discharge occurred over 34  years  and  considering  the  type  of
offense leading to his discharge, they would not  be  opposed  to  upgrading
the applicant’s discharge to under honorable conditions (general), based  on
clemency, if a search of the FBI files reveals no convictions.  However,  we
note that the  FBI  report  indicates  that  the  applicant  has  apparently
committed further misconduct subsequent to his discharge.  In  view  of  the
foregoing,  we  are  not  persuaded  that  an  upgrade  of  the  applicant’s
discharge on the basis of clemency is warranted in  this  case.   Therefore,
favorable action on this appeal is not recommended.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented  did  not  demonstrate
the existence of an 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  BC-2003-
03753 in Executive Session on 24 February 2004, under the provisions of  AFI
36-2603:

                  Ms. Olga M. Crerar, Panel Chair
                  Ms. Cheryl Jacobson, Member
                  Mr. John B. Hennessey, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 31 October 2003, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  FBI Investigation.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRSP, dated 26 November 2003.
   Exhibit E.  Letters, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 December 2003.
   Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 16 January 2004, w/atch.




                                OLGA M. CRERAR
                                Panel Chair