RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-00935

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general (under honorable  conditions)  discharge  be  upgraded  to
honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He feels compassion  was  not  used  during  his  discharge,  nor  any
understanding for the situation he was involved in.  He feels as  well
that time is a factor--enough time has passed.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force as an airman basic  on
17 October 1985. On 15 January  1988,  the  applicant  was  discharged
under the  provisions  of  AFR  39-10  (Misconduct-Drug  Abuse),  with
service characterized as general (under honorable conditions)  in  the
grade of airman first class. He served 2 years, 2 months and  29  days
of total active military service.

On 21 October 1987, applicant's commander  recommended  discharge  for
drug abuse.  The basis for the recommendation  was  on  26  May  1987,
applicant  provided  a  urine  sample,  which  tested   positive   for
marijuana.

Applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge on  21
October 1987 and understood if the recommendation  for  discharge  was
approved, he could receive  a  general  (under  honorable  conditions)
discharge.  He also acknowledged that  legal  counsel  had  been  made
available to assist him. On 10 December 1987,  applicant  submitted  a
conditional waiver of the rights  associated  with  an  administrative
discharge board hearing.  His request was contingent on him  receiving
no less than a general (under honorable conditions) discharge.

The  base  legal  office  reviewed  the  case  and  found  it  legally
sufficient to support discharge and recommended the conditional waiver
be accepted and applicant be separated  from  the  Air  Force  with  a
general (under honorable conditions) discharge without  probation  and
rehabilitation.

The commander reviewed the case file  along  with  the  recommendation
from the base legal office  and  sent  the  case  to  23rd  Air  Force
Commander recommending he accept the conditional waiver  and  separate
applicant with  an  general  (under  honorable  conditions)  discharge
without probation and rehabilitation.

Headquarters 23rd Air Force legal office reviewed the  case  file  and
found it legally sufficient to support  discharge.   They  recommended
the conditional waiver be accepted and applicant be separated  with  a
general (under honorable conditions) discharge without  probation  and
rehabilitation.

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/DPPRS  recommended  denial.   They  state  that  based   on   the
documentation on file in the master personnel records,  the  discharge
was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the
discharge regulation.  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 facts warranting a change to his character
of service.

AFPC/DPPRS complete evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the Air  Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant on 16 April 2004, for review and comment within 30 days.  As
of this date, no response has been received by this office.   The  FBI
Report was forwarded to the applicant on 7 May  2004  for  review  and
comment within 15 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 that failure to timely file.

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 applicant’s submission, we  are  not  persuaded
that his discharge should be upgraded to honorable.  The applicant has
not  established  by  his  submission  that  the  discharge  was   not
consistent  with  procedural  and  substantive  requirements  of   the
discharge regulations or that it was not within the  sound  discretion
of the discharge authority.  Therefore, we agree with the opinions and
recommendation of the Air Force and adopt their rationale as the basis
for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain  his  burden
of having suffered either an error or an  injustice.    Therefore,  in
absence of evidence to the contrary, we find  no  basis  to  recommend
granting the relief sought.

4.    The documentation provided with this case was sufficient to give
the Board a clear understanding of the issues involved and a  personal
appearance, with or without legal counsel, would not  have  materially
added to that understanding.  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 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 Docket  Number  BC-2004-
00935 in Executive Session on 30 June 2004, under  the  provisions  of
AFI 36-2603:

                 Ms. Brenda L. Romine, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Jean Reynolds, Member
                 Mr. Vance E. Lineberger, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 14 Jun 03, w/atch.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. FBI Report, dated 23 Apr 04.
      Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 9 Apr 04.
      Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 16 Apr 04.






      BRENDA L. ROMINE
      Panel Chair