RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-00475
            INDEX NUMBER:  100.05, 110.02

            COUNSEL:  AMERICAN LEGION


            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

__________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her narrative reason for separation be upgraded or modified.

__________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The narrative reason for separation, ”Misconduct –  Drug  Abuse,”
has been an impediment to her personal freedom.  In the past, she
has been turned down for employment because of the words in  item
#28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) on her DD  Form  214.   She
also feels this  injustice  has  impacted  her  viability  to  be
accepted to law school.

In support of her  appeal,  the  applicant  provided  a  personal
statement, a  copy  of  her  DD  Form  214,  and  copies  of  her
accomplishments in her educational  career.   She  also  provided
testimonial letters from  her  Pastor  and  Professor,  a  credit
report, and a  criminal  report  to  show  she  has  no  criminal
history.

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

__________________________________________________________________
_

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 15 Nov  85  for  a
period of 4 years in the  grade  of  airman  basic.   The  record
contains one airman performance report with an overall rating  of
“9.”

On 15 Apr 87, the applicant’s commander notified her that he  was
recommending that she  be  discharged  from  the  Air  Force  for
misconduct – drug abuse.  The reason for the proposed action  was
the applicant’s wrongful use of  marijuana,  as  evidenced  by  a
positive commander-directed urinalysis, for which she received  a
letter of reprimand on 14 Apr 87.  The applicant was  advised  of
her rights and that a general discharge was recommended.

After consulting with counsel, applicant submitted a statement in
her own behalf.  On 21 Apr 87, the Staff Judge Advocate  reviewed
the case and found it legally  sufficient  to  support  discharge
action.  He noted that  the  commander  directed  nature  of  the
urinalysis  mandated  that  the  urinalysis  could  be  used   to
determine if the respondent was subject to discharge,  but  could
not be used to characterize service.  In  the  absence  of  other
derogatory data, applicant’s service  must  be  characterized  as
honorable.

On 22 Apr 87, the discharge authority approved the separation and
directed   an   honorable   discharge   without   probation   and
rehabilitation.

On 23 Apr 87, the applicant was honorably  discharged  under  the
provisions of AFR 39-10, (Misconduct  –  Drug  Abuse).   She  was
credited with 1 year, 5 months, and 9  days  of  active  military
service.

__________________________________________________________________
_

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS reviewed this application and  recommended  denial,
stating the discharge was  consistent  with  the  procedural  and
substantive  requirements  of  the  discharge  regulation.    The
discharge was within the discretion of  the  discharge  authority
and the correct narrative reason for discharge was “misconduct  –
drug abuse.”  Applicant did not submit any evidence  or  identify
any  errors  or  injustices  that  occurred  in   the   discharge
processing.  She provided no facts warranting  a  change  to  the
narrative reason for her separation.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit C.
__________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Counsel has reiterated applicant’s contentions;  further  stating
the applicant is not a habitual drug user, yet the effect of  the
narrative reason on  the  DD-214  has  the  force  in  effect  as
continuing to this day as  if  she  was  of  such  character  and
continued with  such  behavior.   Counsel  addressed  applicant’s
supporting documents, stating they testify by themselves  to  her
involvement in her community in both an industrial and  spiritual
capacity.  He also speaks  of  her  educational  accomplishments.
(Exhibit E)

__________________________________________________________________
_

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.  After a thorough review of the evidence of record we  see  no
evidence to show that the applicant’s discharge was erroneous  or
unjust.   However,  we  recognize  the  adverse  impact  of   the
applicant’s narrative reason for discharge; and while it may have
been appropriate at the time, we believe in light of the  unusual
circumstances of this case that it would be an injustice for  the
applicant to continue to suffer its effects.  In consideration of
the applicant’s achievements since her  discharge  in  particular
her distinctive post-service educational accomplishments, and  no
evidence that  she  has  had  any  subsequent  involvement  of  a
derogatory nature since her separation from  the  Air  Force,  we
believe that corrective action is appropriate  on  the  basis  of
clemency.   Accordingly,  we  recommend  that  her   records   be
corrected to the extent indicated below.

__________________________________________________________________
_

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to  show  that  on  23  April
1987, she was  discharged  under  the  provisions  of  AFR-39-10,
paragraph   1-2 (Directed by Secretary of the Air Force), with  a
Separation Program Designator (SPD) Code of JFF.

__________________________________________________________________
_

The following members  of  the  Board  considered  AFBCMR  Docket
Number BC-2004-00475 in Executive Session on 24 Jun 04, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Laurence M. Groner, Panel Chair
      Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Member
      Mr. John B. Hennessey, Member

All members voted to correct the records,  as  recommended.   The
following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 6 Oct 03, w/atchs
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 9 Mar 04
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 Mar 04
     Exhibit E.  Counsel’s Statement, dated 23 Apr 04




                                   LAURENCE M. GRONER
                                   Panel Chair



AFBCMR BC-2004-00475




MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

      Having received and considered the recommendation of the
Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the
authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat
116), it is directed that:

      The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air
Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 23
April 1987, she was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-10,
paragraph 1-2 (Directed by Secretary of the Air Force), with a
Separation Program Designator (SPD) Code of JFF.






            JOE G. LINEBERGER
            Director
            Air Force Review Boards Agency