RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-00067
                                       INDEX CODE:  110.02
      XXXXXXXXXXXXXX                    COUNSEL:  NONE

      XXXXXXXXXXX                            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His narrative reason for separation  be  changed  from  “misconduct  -  drug
abuse” to “early out.”

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

There is no evidence of drug abuse in his records or any indication he  ever
used any illegal substance.  He was coerced into  making  such  a  statement
due to a tip he gave the Office of Special  Investigations  that  led  to  a
bust not as successful as they desired.  He requests to have the reason  for
his discharge be changed because he would like to gain employment  with  the
US Agency for International Development.

In  support  of  his  application,  he  provides  a  personal  statement,  a
character reference, copy of his resume,  a  copy  of  a  newspaper  article
about himself, a letter of commendation, three  letters  of  recommendation,
and a copy of his college transcript.  The applicant’s complete  submission,
with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 19 October 1989 the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air  Force  at  the
age of 18 in the grade of airman basic (E-1) for a  period  of  four  years.
He was trained  as  a  Munitions  Systems  Specialist.   The  applicant  was
promoted to the grade of airman first class (E-3) effective and with a  date
of rank of 19 February 1991.

On 26 February 1991, the applicant  turned  himself  in  for  treatment  and
confessed to smoking a controlled substance on two  occasions  during  March
1990.   On  1  May  1991,  his  commander  notified  the  applicant  of  his
recommendation to discharge the applicant for misconduct - drug abuse.   The
applicant acknowledged receipt of the recommendation, consulted counsel  and
submitted a statement in his own behalf.  On 3 May 1991,  the  Area  Defense
Council (ADC)  found  the  case  to  be  legally  insufficient  because  the
applicant’s drug abuse was not  substantiated.   The  ADC  stated  that  the
applicant’s declaration of drug use, regardless of how  many  times,  or  to
whom, was insufficient.  The applicant’s urinalysis came back  negative  and
there was no independent support by any witness.  The  ADC’s  recommendation
was to terminate the applicant’s discharge action.   On  22  May  1991,  the
applicant’s  wing  commander  concurred  with  the  recommendation  for   an
honorable discharge without probation and rehabilitation.  On 30  May  1991,
the applicant received Article 15 punishment for failure to go at  the  time
prescribed to his place of  duty.   Punishment  consisted  of  reduction  in
grade to airman (E-2).  On 17 June 1991, the staff judge advocate found  the
case to be legally sufficient to discharge the applicant with  an  honorable
characterization of service because the applicant himself provided the  sole
evidence of drug abuse.  The staff judge advocate also stated  that  members
discharged for drug abuse are not eligible for probation or  rehabilitation.
  On  24  June  1991,  the  discharge  authority  approved  the  applicant’s
honorable discharge, without probation or rehabilitation.  On 11 July  1991,
the  applicant  was  honorably  discharged  with  a  narrative  reason   for
separation of “misconduct - drug abuse.”  He served 1 year, 8 months and  23
days on active duty.

On 5 February 1992, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB)  considered
and, by majority vote, disapproved the applicant’s  request  to  change  his
narrative reason for discharge.  Three  board  members  voted  to  deny  the
applicant’s request and two board members voted to  change  the  applicant’s
reason for separation to “convenience of the government.”

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  DPPRS states the  applicant’s  discharge  was
consistent  with  the  procedural  and  substantive  requirements   of   the
discharge regulation in affect at that time.   Additionally,  the  discharge
was within the discretion of the discharge  authority.   The  applicant  did
not provide any facts warranting a change  in  his  discharge,  nor  did  he
submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices  that  occurred
in his discharge processing.  The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded  to  the  applicant  on  13
February 2004, for review and comment within 30 days  (Exhibit  D).   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 injustice.  After reviewing all the evidence provided,  we  see
no evidence to show that the applicant’s discharge was erroneous or  unjust.
 Nevertheless,  after  reviewing  his  submission,  the  Board  majority  is
persuaded that the applicant has provided sufficient  evidence  to  conclude
that in the years  following  his  separation,  he  has  made  a  successful
adjustment to  civilian  life.   This  is  evident  by  his  accomplishments
involving his education, career, and service to his community.  We note  the
recommendation  from  the  Air  Force  office  of  primary   responsibility;
however, in view of the applicant’s post service  record  and  consideration
of his age and immaturity at the time of his discharge, the  Board  majority
believes changing his narrative reason  for  discharge  from  “Misconduct  -
Drug  Abuse”  to  “Secretarial  Authority”  is  warranted.   Therefore,  the
majority of the Board recommends that his records be corrected as  indicated
below.

_________________________________________________________________

RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air  Force  relating
to APPLICANT be corrected to show that the narrative reason for  separation,
issued in conjunction with her honorable discharge  on  11  July  1991,  was
“Directed by  Secretary  of  the  Air  Force”  and  the  separation  program
designator (SPD) code was “JFF.”

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of  the  Board  considered  this  application,  AFBCMR
Docket Number BC-2004-00067 in Executive Session  on  13 April  2004,  under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

            Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
            Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Member
            Mr. James W. Russell III, Member

By a majority vote, the Board voted to correct the  record  as  recommended.
Mr. Russell voted to deny the applicant’s appeal but chose not to  submit  a
minority report.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 22 Dec 03 with attachments.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 5 Feb 04.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 Feb 04.




                                  MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
                                                   Panel Chair


AFBCMR BC-2004-00067


MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

      Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force
Board of 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 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, be corrected to show that on 11
July 1991, he was separated under the provisions of AFR 39-10, paragraph
1-2, (Directed by Secretary of the Air Force) and the separation program
designator (SPD) code was “JFF.”




                                                       JOE G. LINEBERGER
                                                       Director
                                                       Air Force Review
                 Boards Agency