RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-03418
            INDEX CODE 106.00
            COUNSEL:  None

            HEARING DESIRED:  Not Indicated


MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE:  7 May 06


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her 2003 Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be upgraded.

[Note:  Under  Title  10,  USC,  Section  1552(f),  the  Board  cannot
reverse, set aside, or otherwise expunge  a  court-martial  conviction
that occurred on or after  5  May  50;  only  the  punishment  may  be
changed.]

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She has tried hard to become a productive member  in  society  and  is
currently enrolled in college.  She has held the same job for  a  year
and one-half.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 15 Mar 00.

On 24 May 00, the applicant was notified of her commander's intent  to
impose nonjudicial punishment upon her for violating a lawful  general
instruction at or near Sheppard AFB, TX,  by  wrongfully  affixing  or
displaying  jewelry  through  the  tongue,  by  wrongfully   consuming
alcoholic beverages while under the legal  drinking  age  of  21,  and
being disorderly  on  or  about  30  Apr  00.   On  26 May  00,  after
consulting with counsel, the applicant waived her right to a trial  by
court-martial, did not request a personal appearance but did submit  a
written presentation.  On 1 Jun  00,  she  was  found  guilty  by  her
commander who imposed punishment in the form of forfeiture of  $100.00
pay per month for two months
and 30  days  of  confinement.   The  applicant  did  not  appeal  the
punishment and the Article 15 was filed in her Unfavorable Information
File (UIF).

On 8 Jul 02, the applicant, then an airman first class assigned to the
75th Fighter Squadron at Pope AFB, NC,  was  tried  before  a  general
court-martial for wrongful use of LSD and Ecstasy and  dereliction  of
duty for underage drinking between, on or about 1 Oct  00  and  30 Nov
00.  She pled guilty to wrongful use of LSD and underage drinking  but
not guilty to wrongful use  of  Ecstasy.   She  was  found  guilty  of
underage drinking and using LSD, but not guilty of using Ecstasy.  She
was sentenced to a BCD, confinement to 60 days, forfeiture of all  pay
and allowances, and reduction to airman basic.   On  13  Aug  02,  the
convening  authority  approved  the  sentence.   Since  her   approved
sentence included a BCD, the US Air Force Court  of  Criminal  Appeals
reviewed the applicant’s conviction.  According to AFLSA/JAJM,  on  25
Apr 03, the US Air  Force  Court  of  Criminal  Appeals  affirmed  the
sentence and the applicant did not petition the US  Court  of  Appeals
for the Armed Forces  for  review.   On  4 Aug  03,  she  was  ordered
separated with a BCD.

On 8 Oct 03, the applicant was separated in the grade of airman  basic
with a BCD after three years, five months  and  five  days  of  active
service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFLSA/JAJM contends  the  applicant’s  punitive  discharge  accurately
reflects the character of her service.  The sentence was  well  within
the legal limits  and  was  a  fitting  punishment  for  the  offenses
committed.  Although the applicant is to be commended for getting  her
life on track, she committed serious offenses that  warranted  a  BCD.
Her desire to become a productive member of society is noteworthy  but
does not overcome the fact that  she  did  not  serve  honorably.   To
classify her service as honorable would be to  put  her  on  an  equal
footing with thousands of members of the armed forces who have  served
honorably during a wartime environment.  Clemency is not  appropriate.
Denial is recommended.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the Air  Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant on 11 Mar 05 for review and comment within 30 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 timely filed.

3.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of error or injustice.  We note this  Board  is  without
authority to reverse, set aside, or otherwise expunge a  court-martial
conviction.  Rather, in accordance with Title 10, United States  Code,
Section 1552(f), actions by this Board are limited to  corrections  to
the record to reflect actions taken by  the  reviewing  officials  and
action on the  sentence  of  the  court-martial  for  the  purpose  of
clemency.  There is nothing in the evidence provided, other  than  the
applicant’s unsubstantiated  allegations,  leading  us  to  believe  a
change to the actions of any of the reviewing officials is  warranted.
We  also  find  no  evidence  indicating   the   applicant’s   service
characterization, which had its basis in  her  conviction  by  general
court-martial and was a part of the sentence of  the  military  court,
was improper or exceeded the limitations set forth in the Uniform Code
of Military Justice.  Furthermore, we do not find upgrading her BCD on
the basis of clemency is appropriate at this time.  We  encourage  the
applicant to continue her post-service efforts at rehabilitation  but,
given the short duration since her separation, believe she has not yet
established a record of good  citizenry  that  overcomes  the  serious
misconduct that led to her BCD.  In  view  of  the  above  and  absent
persuasive evidence to the contrary, the applicant has  not  sustained
her burden of  having  suffered  either  an  error  or  an  injustice.
Therefore, we find no  compelling  basis  to  recommend  granting  the
relief sought.

_________________________________________________________________

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 21 April 2005 under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                 Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Renee M. Collier, Member
                 Mr. Alan A. Blomgren, Member

The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2004-03418 was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 29 Dec 04.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFLSA/JAJM, dated 28 Feb 05.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Mar 05.




                                   RICHARD A. PETERSON
                                   Panel Chair