RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-01190
            INDEX CODE: 110.02
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to  honorable
and her narrative reason for separation be changed to misconduct-general.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The character of her  discharge  and  narrative  reason  were  unjust.   Her
military records concur her performance exemplified good  citizenship.   She
was  promoted  to  Staff  Sergeant  ahead  of  her  peers,  actively  sought
training, and was never reprimanded or given any disciplinary  action.   She
never tested positive for illegal or controlled substances.

While completing a security  clearance  application,  her  strong  religious
beliefs persuaded her  to  voluntarily  self-disclose  her  use  of  illegal
drugs.  She does  not  regret  her  decision  to  admit  illegal  drug  use;
however, she  should  not  be  permanently  classified  and  marred  with  a
separation narrative reason of drug abuse, nor  experience  the  undesirable
ramifications of  having  a  general  discharge.   Her  time  was  honorably
served, even to the last  decision  of  her  military  service  career  that
resulted in her discharge.

She has an opportunity to become a corrections officer  with  the  New  York
City Department of Corrections, and would like to use her military  training
experience to make a change in  others  while  maintaining  law  and  order.
However,  she  cannot  include  her  military  service  time  to  meet   the
prerequisite qualifications because of the  discharge  classification.   She
has raised four beautiful young adults, and is a grandmother  of  two.   She
wants to begin a new season of life.

In  support  of  the  application,  the  applicant  submits   her   personal
statement, NYC Dept of Corrections candidate  letter,  and  a  copy  of  her
separation document (DD 214).  The  applicant's  complete  submission,  with
attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 17 November 1980, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force in  the
grade of airman basic (E-1) at the age of  17  for  a  period  of  four  (4)
years.  She was progressively  promoted  to  the  grade  of  Staff  Sergeant
effective and with a date of rank of 1 October 1985.   The  following  is  a
resume of her Airman Performance Reports (APRs), commencing with the  report
closing 16 November 1980.

      PERIOD ENDING    OVERALL EVALUATION

      16 November 1980       9
      17 September 1982 (A1C/CRO)       9
      31 August 1983    (SrA/CRO)       9
      29 July 1984      (Sgt/CRO)       8
      29 July 1985           9
      29 July 1986      (SSgt)          9

On 11 March 1987,  the  applicant’s  commander  notified  her  that  he  was
recommending that she be discharged from the Air Force under AFR 39-10,  for
drug abuse and fraudulent entry based on her  admissions  of  marijuana  use
prior to her enlistment in  1980  and  use  of  cocaine  on  three  or  four
occasions in August 1986.  The applicant was advised of her  rights.   Under
advice of counsel, the applicant offered a conditional waiver of the  rights
associated with an administrative discharge board hearing,  contingent  upon
her receipt of no less than a general discharge.   The  discharge  case  was
reviewed by the Staff Judge Advocate and found legally  sufficient.   On  12
March  1987,  the  applicant’s  wing  commander  recommended  the  discharge
authority accept the offer of a conditional waiver  and  approve  a  general
discharge without probation and rehabilitation.

On 19 March 1987, in an addendum, the applicant’s  group  commander  advised
her  of  rights  associated  with  a  conditional  waiver.   The   applicant
acknowledged receipt, and  submitted  a  personal  statement.   On  31 March
1987, a Deputy Staff Judge Advocate reviewed the case file, and  recommended
acceptance of the applicant’s conditional waiver.  The  discharge  authority
approved the conditional waiver of a discharge board entitlement on  3 April
1987, and directed the applicant be  discharged  with  a  general  discharge
without probation and rehabilitation.

On 24 April 1987, the applicant was discharged  under  honorable  conditions
(general) in the grade of Staff Sergeant, under the provisions  of  AFR  39-
10, Misconduct-Drug Abuse.  She had served five years, five months  and  one
day on active duty.

In response to the Board’s request, the FBI indicated they  were  unable  to
identify with an arrest record pertaining to the applicant on the  basis  of
information furnished (Exhibit D).
_________________________________________________________________



AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  DPPRS states based  on  the  documentation
on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was  consistent  with
procedural and substantive requirements of  the  discharge  regulation,  and
the discharge was within the discretion of the discharge  authority.   DPPRS
notes the applicant did not submit any evidence or identify  any  errors  or
injustices that occurred in the discharge processing, nor  did  she  provide
any facts warranting a change to  her  character  of  service  or  narrative
reason for separation.  DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.  DPPRS  evaluation
is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the  applicant  for
review and comment on 30 April 2004.  As  of  this  date,  this  office  has
received no response (Exhibit D).

_________________________________________________________________

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 thoroughly  reviewing  the  evidence
of record, we find no impropriety in the characterization or  the  narrative
reason for separation of the applicant's discharge.  While it is  true  that
the applicant had compiled  an  outstanding  service  record  prior  to  the
events that led to her separation, we believe  her  voluntary  admission  to
wrongful use of illegal drugs coupled with her status as  a  noncommissioned
officer, overshadowed her prior record  to  a  degree  which  supported  the
service characterization she received.  The applicant believes  her  service
characterization and narrative reason are unjust.  But, it  is  our  opinion
that a  general  (under  other  than  honorable  conditions)  discharge  and
misconduct-drug abuse narrative reason for separation was appropriate  given
the information in her discharge  case  file  and  the  seriousness  of  her
misconduct.  Other than  the  assertions  of  the  applicant,  she  has  not
provided documentary evidence, which would  lead  us  to  believe  that  her
discharge was contrary to the provisions of the  governing  directive  under
which it was  effected,  that  her  commanders  abused  their  discretionary
authority, or that the information contained in the discharge case file  was
factually incorrect.  In the absence of evidence by the applicant  attesting
to a successful post-service adjustment in the years  after  her  discharge,
we are not inclined to extend clemency at this time.   However,  should  the
applicant provide evidence at some later  time  showing  she  has  become  a
productive and successful member of society, and that she has exhibited  the
qualities associated with good citizenship,  she  may  provide  evidence  of
that fact to the Board with a request for clemency.

________________________________________________________________

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 AFBCMR Docket Number  BC-2004-
01190 in Executive Session on 28 October 2004, under the provisions  of  AFI
36-2603:

                 Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Martha A. Maust, Member
                 Mr. Michael J. Maglio, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 9 Apr 04, with attachments.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 27 Apr 04.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 April 04.




                                   RICHARD A. PETERSON
                                   Panel Chair