RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBERS:  BC-2004-02034
            INDEX CODE 106.00
            COUNSEL:  None

            HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His 1989 general discharge be upgraded to honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The discharge is unjust because of inappropriate and  illegal  conduct
by the Air Force Office of Special  Investigations  (AFOSI)  (such  as
coercion of statements, scare tactics, and  threats),  lack  of  solid
evidence, and drug-free urine samples for three years.   He  has  been
unable to retrieve OSI documents concerning interviews at  Dyess  AFB,
TX.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 17 Nov 86  and  was
assigned to the 463rd Organizational  Maintenance  Squadron  at  Dyess
AFB, TX.  He was promoted to the grade of airman first class on  3 Jan
87.

The applicant received a Letter of Counseling (LOC) on 4  May  87  for
being apprehended by the Abilene Police on 2 May 87 at 2233 hours as a
minor in possession.  He received another LOC on 25 Aug 97 for lack of
initiative in performing his assigned tasks.

The applicant’s Airman Performance Report (APR) for the period closing
16 Nov 87 gave him an overall rating of 8 out of 9.   The  rater  also
commented the applicant completely reversed his attitude  towards  the
job after being counseled on numerous occasions and receiving  an  LOC
on his lack of initiative and self-motivation.  The APR for the period
ending 16 Nov 88 had an overall rating of 9.

According to an AFOSI Report of Investigation (ROI), dated  3 Mar  89,
an investigation was conducted around the period of 23 Jan - 7 Feb 89.
 Three airmen first class, who were  also  investigated  by  the  OSI,
provided statements indicating they had either smoked  marijuana  with
the applicant, or observed the applicant smoking marijuana, on several
occasions.   Apparently,  two  other  squadron  members  [no   further
details] also confirmed the  applicant  used  marijuana.  After  being
advised of his rights on 2 Feb 89, the applicant provided a  statement
admitting to marijuana use about 15-20 times, beginning in the fall of
1988.  He purchased marijuana from a civilian.  He indicated  he  used
it to relieve tension caused by his and  his  parents’  divorces.   He
added he knew this was not the answer and wanted  to  redeem  himself.
The applicant consented to a urinalysis on 2 Feb 89.

On 28 Feb 89, the commander imposed Article 15 punishment in the  form
of reduction from airman first class to airman  for  wrongful  use  of
marijuana on diverse occasions between, on or about 7 Dec 88 and 2 Feb
89.  The applicant made a personal  appearance  but  did  not  present
written materials, and did not appeal the punishment.

The urinalysis results returned on 2 Mar  89  and  showed  a  negative
presence of [marijuana].

On 6 Mar 89, the commander notified the applicant  of  his  intent  to
recommend separation with a general discharge based on the Article 15.
 The applicant acknowledged receipt  and  the  commander  subsequently
recommended the applicant for a general discharge on  6 Mar  89.   The
commander did not recommend probation and rehabilitation  (P&R).   The
applicant consulted counsel but waived his right to submit statements.

Legal review on 8 Mar 89 found the case sufficient for  discharge  and
the discharge authority subsequently directed the applicant’s  general
discharge for drug use.  On 9 Mar 89, the applicant was separated with
a general discharge for misconduct--drug abuse after 2 years, 3 months
and 23 days of active service.

Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau  of  Investigation
(FBI), Washington, D.C., provided an investigative  report,  which  is
attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS found the discharge was consistent with  the  procedural
and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation,  and  within
the  discharge  authority’s  discretion.   The   applicant   has   not
substantiated any errors  or  injustices  and  his  appeal  should  be
denied.

A complete copy of the evaluation is 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 Jul 04 for review and comment within 30 days.   As  of
this date, this office has received no response.

On 9 Sep 04, a copy of the FBI report was forwarded to  the  applicant
for review and comment within 14 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.    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 general  discharge  should  be  upgraded.   We  find  no
impropriety in the characterization of his discharge  and  responsible
officials apparently applied appropriate standards  in  effecting  the
separation.   Further,  the  applicant  has  provided  no   persuasive
evidence supporting his  allegations  that  his  rights  were  denied,
pertinent regulations were violated, or illegal  actions  or  coercion
occurred.  We  therefore  conclude  the  discharge’s  proceedings  and
characterization  were  proper  and  appropriate   to   the   existing
circumstances.  In addition, based on the FBI  report,  the  applicant
continued his misbehavior after his discharge rather than  becoming  a
law-abiding and productive citizen.  In view of the above  and  absent
persuasive evidence to the contrary, we agree with the Air Force  that
the applicant has not established he was the victim  of  an  error  or
injustice and his case should be denied.

_________________________________________________________________

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 4 November 2004 under the provisions of  AFI  36-
2603:

                 Mr. Robert S. Boyd, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Garry G. Sauner, Member
                 Ms. Carolyn B. Willis, Member

The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2004-02034 was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 23 Jun 04.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  FBI Report
   Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 12 Jul 04
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 16 Jul 04.
   Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 9 Sep 04.




                                   ROBERT S. BOYD
                                   Panel Chair