RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                        DOCKET  NUMBER:   BC-2005-
00585
                                             INDEX CODE:  110.00

                                             COUNSEL:  NONE

                                             HEARING DESIRED:  YES



MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  21 AUGUST 2006


___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was told that after ten years of separation from the service and
if in good standing in the civilian world, his discharge  could  be
upgraded to honorable.

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

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 27 May 77; he served
on continuous active duty and  entered  his  last  reenlistment  on
30 Mar 83, for a period of six years.  His highest grade  held  was
staff sergeant.

On 23 Jan 87, applicant received a Letter of  Reprimand  (LOR)  for
wrongful use of marijuana between Jan 81 and Jul 83, and  making  a
false official statement, on or  about  2  Nov  86,  to  a  Defense
Investigative Service (DIS) investigator,  that  he  had  not  used
drugs.

On 25 Feb 87, the group commander notified the  applicant  that  he
was not recommended for promotion to TSgt due to his  wrongful  use
of marijuana and making a false statement to the DIS.  The duration
of the nonrecommendation action was Cycle 88A6.

On 8 May 87, the squadron section commander notified the  applicant
that he was recommending he be discharged from the  Air  Force  for
commission of a serious  offense.   He  recommended  the  applicant
receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge based on
the incidents cited above for which he received an LOR  on  23  Jan
87.

On 22 May 87,  applicant  acknowledged  receipt  of  the  discharge
notification and that he had consulted with military counsel.   The
applicant offered a conditional waiver  of  the  rights  associated
with an administrative discharge board hearing, contingent  on  his
receipt of no less than an  under  honorable  conditions  (general)
discharge.  On 1 Jun 87, the  group  Acting  Staff  Judge  Advocate
found the case file legally sufficient  to  support  discharge  and
recommended  the  conditional  waiver  be  accepted  and  applicant
receive an under honorable conditions (general)  discharge  without
probation and  rehabilitation.   The  Weapons  Center  Staff  Judge
Advocate reviewed the case and  found  it  legally  sufficient  and
recommended approval of applicant’s waiver and that he  receive  an
under honorable conditions (general)  discharge  without  probation
and rehabilitation.

On 3 Jun 87,  the  discharge  authority  accepted  the  conditional
waiver and directed that applicant  be  discharged  with  an  under
honorable conditions  (general)  discharge  without  probation  and
rehabilitation.

Applicant was discharged on 10  Jun  87,  in  the  grade  of  staff
sergeant,  under  the  provisions  of  AFR  39-10,  by  reason   of
misconduct-other serious offenses, with  service  characterized  as
under honorable conditions (general).  He was issued an RE Code  of
2B [separated with a general discharge].  He was  credited  with  a
total of 10 years and 14 days of active military service.

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

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS found that the  discharge  was  consistent  with  the
procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation
and recommended disapproval of applicant’s request.   Additionally,
the discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority.
 They also noted the applicant  did  not  submit  any  evidence  or
identify any errors or injustices that occurred  in  the  discharge
processing, or  provide  any  facts  warranting  a  change  to  his
character of service.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit D.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 1 Apr 05, a copy of the Air Force evaluation  was  forwarded  to
the applicant for review and comment within 30 days.   As  of  this
date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit E).

On 15 Apr 05, the AFBCMR staff offered the applicant an opportunity
to provide information pertaining to his activities  since  leaving
the service (Exhibit F).  On 26 Apr 05, a copy of the FBI Report of
Investigation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment
(Exhibit G).  To 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 the failure to timely file.

3.  Insufficient  relevant   evidence   has   been   presented   to
demonstrate the existence of error  or  injustice.   After  careful
consideration of the available evidence, the discharge  appears  to
be in compliance with the governing regulations in  effect  at  the
time and we find no  evidence  to  indicate  that  the  applicant’s
separation from the  Air  Force  was  inappropriate.   We  find  no
evidence of error in this case and after thoroughly  reviewing  the
documentation that has been submitted  in  support  of  applicant’s
appeal, we do not believe he has suffered from  an  injustice.   In
addition,  the  applicant  has  not  provided   any   documentation
concerning his post-service activities and accomplishments  for  us
to conclude that the characterization  of  his  service  should  be
upgraded to fully honorable based on clemency.  Therefore, based on
the available evidence of record, we find no basis  upon  which  to
favorably consider his request.

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  issues  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 Docket Number BC-2005-
00585 in Executive Session on 18 May 2005, under the provisions  of
AFI 36-2603:

      Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Panel Chair
      Mr. Wallace F. Beard Jr., Member
      Ms. Rita S. Looney, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 Feb 05, w/atch.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  FBI Report of Investigation
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 24 Mar 05.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 Apr 05.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 15 Apr 05, w/atch.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 26 Apr 05, w/atch.




                                   KATHLEEN F. GRAHAM
                                   Panel Chair