RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-01016
            INDEX CODE:  110.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  26 SEPTEMBER 2006

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Misconduct - drug abuse  was  alleged.   He  admitted  to  using  drug
experimentally during period of 1978.

Applicant does not submit any documentation in support of the  appeal.
Applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 24 February 1977 for  a
period of four years.  He was honorably released from active  duty  in
the grade of sergeant on 23 February 1981, having served four years on
active duty.  He reenlisted in the Regular Air Force in the  grade  of
sergeant on 3 May 1982 for a period of four years and reenlisted on 10
July 1985 for a period of six years.  His highest grade held was staff
sergeant.  He received 12 Airman Performance Reports (APRs) closing  1
March 1978, 18 July 1978, 31 December 1978, 31 December 1979, 10  June
1980, 29 December 1980, 4 May 1983,  30  November  1983,  30  November
1984, 16 September 1986, 15 September 1987 and 15 September  1988,  in
which the overall evaluations were “6,” “8,” “9,” “9,” “8,” “8,”  “9,”
“9,” “9,” “9,” “9,” and “9.”

On 31 July 1989, the applicant’s commander notified the  applicant  he
was considering the imposition of nonjudicial punishment on him  under
Article 15, UCMJ based on allegations the applicant had used marijuana
between on or about 1 and 31 October 1988.  It was also alleged  that,
on or about 7 April 1989, he had made a false official   statement  to
the effect he denied knowledge of alleged drug use in his home  or  in
his presence, which he  did  not  then  believe  to  be  true.   After
consulting counsel, the applicant waived his right to demand trial  by
court-martial and accepted the nonjudicial proceedings.  He  requested
the opportunity to make an oral  presentation  to  the  commander  but
declined to present written comments for  review.   After  considering
the matters presented by the applicant, the  commander  determined  he
had committed  one  or  more  of  the  offenses  alleged  and  imposed
punishment on the applicant.  He was reduced in grade to sergeant  (E-
4) and was ordered to perform 14 days of extra  duty.   The  applicant
did not submit an appeal to the punishment.   On  8 August  1989,  his
noncommissioned officer status was vacated  and  he  reverted  to  the
grade of senior airman (E-4).

On 17 August 1989, applicant’s commander  notified  him  that  he  was
recommending discharge from the Air Force for drug abuse.   The  basis
for the commander’s recommendation was applicant received  an  Article
15 for wrongfully using marijuana and subscribing under lawful oath  a
false statement.  Applicant acknowledged receipt of  the  notification
of discharge and after consulting with legal counsel waived his  right
to a hearing before an administrative discharge board contingent  upon
receipt of no  less  than  an  under  honorable  conditions  (general)
discharge.  The Wing and Numbered Air Force legal offices reviewed the
case and found it legally sufficient to support discharge, recommended
that applicant’s conditional waiver be accepted and he  be  discharged
with an under honorable conditions (general) discharge.  The discharge
authority accepted applicant’s conditional waiver and directed that he
be discharged with an under honorable conditions (general) discharge.

Applicant was separated from the Air Force on 22 September 1989  under
the provisions of  AFR  39-10,  Administrative  Separation  of  Airmen
(misconduct  -  drug  abuse),  with  an  under  honorable   conditions
(general) discharge.  He was credited with 11 years, 4 months  and  20
days on active duty.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of  Investigation,
Clarksburg,  West  Virginia,  indicated  on  the  basis  of  the  data
furnished they were unable to locate an arrest record (Exhibit C).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS states 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.   A
complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 15 April 2005, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded  to
the applicant for review and response within  30  days.   On  26 April
2005, the applicant was invited to provide information  pertaining  to
his activities since leaving the service (Exhibit E).

On 28 April 2005, applicant provided a statement saying the facts  are
that he never used marijuana during his time served in  the  military.
At that time he  was  attempting  to  secure  a  Top  Secret  Security
Clearance for a position he was qualified for  and  which  would  have
resulted in a promotion had he got  it.   During  the  course  of  the
Security Clearance process, he was asked if he  would  be  willing  to
submit to a lie detector test to which he replied yes.  During the lie
detector test he was asked if he had ever used marijuana, to which  he
replied yes.  He was also asked if he had ever  used  marijuana  while
serving in the military, to which he replied no.  He was then asked to
make a statement regarding the use of marijuana, which he  volunteered
without hesitation.  He did use marijuana before entering the military
while in high school and college.  Upon  entering  the  Air  Force  in
1976, he was told by the  recruiter  to  deny  any  use  of  marijuana
officially, even after they joked about how everyone had  used  it  at
least once.  The same thing happened again on his  second  enlistment.
The question came up during the recruiting process and he said yes, he
had used marijuana before entering the Air Force.  The recruiter  once
again said to deny any use  of  marijuana  which  he  officially  did.
During the security clearance investigation he was clearly  told  that
now would be the time to speak the truth about any previous  drug  use
or any issues that should be cleared up.  It was his spirit of  intent
to fully  cooperate  with  the  investigating  team  by  honestly  and
truthfully disclosing anything he felt to be questionable in his life.
 He was also told that any admittance he made would be  viewed  as  an
attempt to be truthful and would increase his chances of  getting  the
security clearance.  When he was later informed by  his  commander  he
was recommending discharge, he realized he was duped by people that he
had trusted and confided in.  He was discharged because he admitted to
using marijuana while officially denying it  twice  during  enlistment
and while under oath during previous security investigations.  He  was
completely disillusioned by the Air Force and wanted nothing more than
to separate his services from  what  he  felt  to  be  a  dishonorable
organization with a lynch mob mentality attempting to railroad a  hard
working active duty career military man for a petty  offense.   He  is
now 50 years old and look back upon his military  service  with  great
pride, except for that one instance regarding his  general  discharge.
He thinks the Air Force owes him an apology  and  should  upgrade  his
discharge  to  honorable.   He  would   respectfully   challenge   the
documentation on file in his military personnel records.

On 10 May 2005, applicant  provided  a  statement  pertaining  to  his
activities  since  leaving  the  service.   He  finished  his  college
education and received a Bachelor of Science in Industrial Engineering
from LSU, Baton Rouge 1991, where he moved to Chicago, IL and went  to
work for Motorola Incorporation as  a  Process  Engineer.   He  worked
there until September 1996 and moved with his wife and son to a suburb
of Sacramento, CA.  He has his own  established  consulting  business.
He performs information security  audits  for  banking  and  financial
services throughout the Sacramento area.   This  position  requires  a
very large amount of trust and integrity since  he  is  attempting  to
access very sensitive information on  his  clients’  behalf  regarding
customer and financial information.  His business is  founded  on  the
highest ethical standards.  In addition, integrity and confidentiality
are keys to his business.

It is with great pride that  he  developed  his  heightened  sense  of
security for networks,  data,  physical  operations  and  intellectual
assets from his time served in the USAF.  It is because he is  trained
to think  like  the  hacker  that  he  is  so  successful  in  getting
management buyoff on funding and implementing security practices  that
will protect their networks and assets from intrusion and compromise.

He is also involved in local community  activities.   He  has  coached
Little League Baseball, soccer, and basketball for four years now.  He
is also a member of Rotary International,  and  the  El  Dorado  Hills
Chamber of Commerce.  He and his family  are  active  in  their  local
church and he had served numerous times as  church  council  president
and vice president.

He has always strived to do  the  right  things  for  his  family  and
community putting the needs of others first.  It would mean a  lot  to
him if his discharge were upgraded to honorable.

Applicant's complete responses are attached at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

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.  Evidence has not been  presented
that would lead us to believe the applicant’s discharge was  erroneous
or unjust.  Discharge proceedings were initiated against the applicant
for drug abuse, for which he  received  nonjudicial  punishment.   The
applicant asserts he did not use drugs while in the  military  but  we
note that he accepted the nonjudicial proceedings, rather than  demand
trial by court-martial where the standard of  proof  would  have  been
more rigorous.  Other  than  his  own  assertions,  we  have  seen  no
evidence by the  applicant  indicating  his  substantial  rights  were
violated, the evidence in his discharge case file  was  erroneous,  or
his commanders abused their discretionary authority.   We  have  noted
the applicant’s  statement  concerning  his  post-service  activities.
However, we do not find this statement, alone, sufficient  to  warrant
upgrading his under honorable conditions discharge to fully  honorable
based on  clemency.   Accordingly,  the  applicant’s  request  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 22 June 2005, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                       Mr. Frederick R. Beaman III, Panel Chair
                       Mr. James W. Russell III, Member
                       Ms. B. J. White-Olson, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket  Number
BC-2005-01016 was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 22 Mar 05.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. FBI Report.
      Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 7 Apr 05.
      Exhibit E. Letters, SAF/MRBR and AFBCMR, dated 15 Apr 05
                       and 26 Apr 05.
      Exhibit F. Applicant’s Response, dated 28 Apr 05, w/atch.




                             FREDERICK R. BEAMAN III
                             Panel Chair