RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBERS:  BC-2004-00246
            INDEX CODE 104.00 106.00
            COUNSEL:  None

            HEARING DESIRED:  Yes

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His 2002 dismissal from the USAF Academy  (USAFA)  be  changed  to  an
honorable, or general, discharge.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was court-martialed for attempted use and distribution  of  Ecstasy
one year after the incident occurred. Prior to that time, he  had  not
been in trouble or involved with illegal drugs and was an  outstanding
cadet. He attended a six-hour seminar for alcohol/substance abuse. The
psychiatrist determined he did not meet  the  criteria  for  substance
abuse or dependence. He has gone on to  prove  himself  a  law-abiding
citizen  who  has  been   rehabilitated.    However,   the   dismissal
compromises his ability to live up to his potential. He already has  a
Federal conviction and has to repay the government for his  education.
Each of these challenges is daunting, but he believes he will  not  be
able to overcome the burden of a dismissal.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant took the oath of office and entered the USAFA  Class  of
2002 on 30 Jun 98 directly from high school.

In the fall of 00, a cadet in the applicant’s squadron told him  about
the “positive” effects of using  Ecstasy.  Ecstasy  is  a  Schedule  I
controlled substance. It is taken orally, usually in tablet or capsule
form, and its effects last approximately four to six hours. Users  say
it  produces  profoundly  positive  feelings,  empathy   for   others,
elimination of anxiety, and  extreme  relaxation.  Ecstasy  can  cause
adverse effects such as nausea, chills,  sweating,  involuntary  teeth
clenching, muscle cramping and blurred vision. Around Sep/Oct 00,  the
applicant purchased pills from this cadet,  who  told  him  they  were
Ecstasy. The applicant in turn sold these pills for the same amount of
money to his girlfriend, who had expressed interest in  obtaining  the
drug for herself and her friends. Following  a  second  purchase,  the
applicant and his girlfriend ingested one pill each on 14 Oct 00.  The
applicant only felt somewhat nauseous,  light-headed  and  disoriented
after ingesting the pill. Less than 24 hours afterwards, the applicant
provided  a  urine  sample  that  was  negative  for  any   controlled
substances. It could not be determined if the  pills  were,  in  fact,
Ecstasy.

In a plea bargain on 11 Oct 01, the applicant pled guilty to attempted
wrongful use and distribution of Ecstasy. On 12 Oct 01, he  was  found
guilty by general  court-martial  and  sentenced  to  five  months  of
confinement, forfeiture of $300 pay per month  for  nine  months,  and
dismissal from the Air Force. He attended no classes after this date.

On 10 Jul 02, the applicant was dismissed from  the  Air  Force  after
four years, one month and seven days of active service.

On 27 Sep 02, the Secretary of the Air Force Designee  determined  the
applicant was required to reimburse the government for  his  pro-rated
cost of education (approximately three  full  years  and  65  academic
days). This resulted in a debt of approximately $108,531.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ USAFA/JA asserts drug use and  distribution,  either  attempted  or
completed, is a serious crime in the military.  Military  members  are
fully informed of the serious nature of the abuse  of  illegal  drugs.
The applicant made a conscious choice to ignore his oath  and  violate
the law.  He was appropriately dismissed. To change the  dismissal  to
an honorable administrative discharge would be a slap in the  face  to
anyone who served honorably and upheld the law. Denial is recommended.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The  applicant  contends  this  was  an  isolated  attempted  use  and
distribution on not more than one occasion. He  regrets  this  mistake
and has done his best to redeem himself.  He  attended  the  substance
abuse seminar to help him understand why he made the choices  he  did.
He asks for an honorable, or at least a general, discharge so  he  may
get on with his life in a productive manner.

A complete copy of the rebuttal is at Exhibit E.
_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.    The applicant has exhausted all remedies  provided  by  existing
law or regulations.

2.    The application was timely filed.

3.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of error or injustice. After a thorough  review  of  the
evidence  of  record  and  the  applicant’s  submission,  we  are  not
persuaded his dismissal  from  the  USAFA  should  be  changed  to  an
honorable or general discharge. The applicant’s contentions  are  duly
noted; however, we do not find these assertions, in and by themselves,
sufficiently persuasive to override the evidence of the record and the
rationale provided by the  Air  Force.  The  applicant  contends  this
isolated incident was overcome by his otherwise stellar performance as
a cadet. We disagree. Whether or not the substance he  purchased  was,
in fact, Ecstasy is irrelevant; his intent to purchase, use  and  sell
an illegal drug was clear. This was in violation of his oath  and  the
law. Further, the applicant was discharged less  than  two  years  ago
and, other than  his  own  assertions  and  an  unofficial  university
transcript, has not established to our satisfaction a substantial post-
service history of rehabilitation and responsibility. In view  of  the
above and absent persuasive evidence  to  the  contrary,  we  find  no
compelling basis to grant the relief sought on  the  basis  of  error,
injustice, or clemency and conclude this appeal should be denied.

4.    The applicant’s case is adequately documented  and  it  has  not
been shown that a personal appearance with  or  without  counsel  will
materially  add  to  our  understanding  of  the  issue(s)   involved.
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.
_________________________________________________________________

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  this  application  in
Executive Session on 7 April 2004, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                                  Mr. Joseph A. Roj, Panel Chair
                                  Ms. Rita J. Maldonado, Member
                                  Ms. Leslie E. Abbott, Member


The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2004-00246 was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 Jan 04, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ USAFA/JA, dated 3 Feb 04.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Feb 04.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 29 Mar 04.




                                   JOSEPH A. ROJ
                                   Panel Chair