RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-00096
                                       INDEX CODE:  110.02
      XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX               COUNSEL: NONE

      XXXXXXXXX                         HEARING DESIRED:  NO


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  14 July 2007


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her characterization of discharge be upgraded to  general  (under  honorable
conditions) so she may enter the Air  Force  Reserve  or  the  Air  National
Guard.  In addition, her records be corrected to show she was  convicted  of
only one offense, rather than two or more offenses.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Apart from the misconduct resulting in her court-martial, she otherwise  had
an excellent  record  of  active  duty  service.   The  Air  Force  invested
significant time and money in her, giving her skills with  which  she  could
still make a vital contribution to the Air  Force  mission.   Upgrading  her
discharge to allow her to enter the Air Force Reserve or Air National  Guard
would be in the best interest of the Air Force.  Her records  are  incorrect
based on a letter sent to her by the Board of Nurse Examiners for the  State
of Texas.

In support of her application, she provides a DD Form 293,  Application  for
the Review of Discharge or Dismissal From the Armed  Forces  of  the  United
States; and copies of a letter from the Board of  Nurse  Examiners  for  the
State of Texas, her charge sheet, and DD Form 214,  Certificate  of  Release
or  Discharge  From  Active  Duty.   A  copy  of  the  applicant’s  complete
submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

While serving in the Regular Air Force as a Nurse in the grade  of  captain,
the applicant tested positive for cocaine during a  random  urinalysis  test
conducted on 13 January 2003.  On  24  March  2003,  pursuant  to  a  search
authorization, investigators obtained a  strand  of  the  applicant’s  scalp
hair.  Upon testing, the sample indicated she had used cocaine one to  three
times a month for six to nine months.  On 19 December  2003,  the  applicant
provided another urine sample in response to  a  search  authorization  that
again tested positive for cocaine.

On 2 June  2003,  the  applicant  was  charged  with  one  specification  of
wrongfully using cocaine on divers occasions between  1  July  2002  and  24
March 2003, in violation of Article 112a of the  Uniform  Code  of  Military
Justice (UCMJ).  On 25 June 2003, the  charge  was  referred  for  trial  by
general court-martial.  On 27 January 2004, the  applicant  entered  into  a
pretrial  agreement,  by  which  she  pled  guilty   to   the   charge   and
specification. The convening authority agreed to disapprove any part of  the
sentence more than 180 days confinement and  any  adjudged  fines.   At  her
court-martial, the applicant was  tried  before  a  military  judge  sitting
without a panel of officers.  The applicant pled guilty to,  and  was  found
guilty of, the charge and specification.  The military judge  sentenced  the
applicant to dismissal, confinement for eight months, and forfeiture to  all
pay and allowances.  On 3 March 2004, pursuant to  the  pretrial  agreement,
the convening authority approved only so much of the  sentence  as  provided
for dismissal, confinement for 180 days,  and  forfeiture  of  all  pay  and
allowances and ordered the sentence executed except for the  discharge.   On
10 August 2004, the United  States  Air  Force  Court  of  Criminal  Appeals
affirmed the conviction and the sentence.  On 8 October 2004, the  applicant
petitioned the United States Court of Appeals.   On  8  December  2004,  the
court denied the petition.  On 28 February 2005, the  applicant’s  discharge
was executed.  She served 23 years, 5 months, and 5 days on active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFLSA/JAJM recommends denial.  JAJM states that under 10 United States  Code
(USC)  Section  1552(f),  which  amended   the   basic   corrections   board
legislation, the Air  Force  Board  for  Corrections  of  Military  Record’s
(AFBCMR) ability to correct records related to courts-martial,  is  limited.
Specifically, Section 1552(f)(1) permits  the  correction  of  a  record  to
reflect  actions  taken   by   reviewing   authorities   under   the   UCMJ.
Additionally, Section 1552(f)(2) permits the correction of  records  related
to action on the sentence of a court-martial for the  purpose  of  clemency.
Apart from these two limited exceptions, the effect of  Section  1552(f)  is
that the AFBCMR is without authority to  reverse,  set-aside,  or  otherwise
expunge a courts-martial conviction that occurred on or  after  5  May  1950
(the effective date of the UCMJ).

JAJM states that there is no basis for granting the relief  requested.   The
dismissal was an appropriate punishment within  the  prescribed  limits  and
discretion of the court-martial.  Despite the  applicant’s  contention  that
her military service can be  assessed  apart  from  her  court-martial,  the
determination that  she  should  be  dismissed  was  rightly  based  on  the
totality of her service, including her criminal  conduct.   In  arriving  at
the sentence, the military judge considered the applicant’s service  record,
as did the convening authority in approving  the  sentence.   The  dismissal
fairly reflects the character of the  applicant’s  service,  which  was  far
from “excellent” and  fell  below  the  standards  expected  for  Air  Force
officers.   The  undisputed  evidence  in  the   applicant’s   court-martial
revealed she used cocaine frequently over  a  long  period  of  time.   Such
misconduct is entirely inconsistent with Air Force standards.

JAJM states that as to any error in the records describing  the  results  of
the court-martial, the records are  accurate.   The  applicant  was  charged
with, pled guilty to, and was convicted of one charge of  multiple  uses  of
cocaine which, is accurately reflected in the general  court-martial  orders
in the record of trial.  Further, the  evidence  entered  into  the  record,
including  the  applicant’s  own  admissions  under   oath,   supports   her
conviction for multiple uses  of  cocaine.   Whatever  characterization  the
Texas Board of Nurse Examiners may have given to the court-martial does  not
render the applicant’s military records inaccurate.

The JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded  to  the  applicant  on  14
April 2006 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 probable error or injustice.   The  applicant’s  discharge  had
its basis in his trial  and  conviction  by  a  court-martial  and  she  has
provided  no  evidence  showing  that  the  sentence  exceeded  the  maximum
punishment allowable based on the offense of which she  was  convicted.   We
feel obligated to note that, 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 which would  lead  us  to  believe  that  a
change to the actions of any of the reviewing officials  is  warranted.   In
view of the extreme seriousness of the misconduct she committed (i.e.,  drug
use over an extended period of time, and  the  well-publicized  consequences
of drug use by military members), and the short period  of  time  since  her
separation, we do not believe a sufficiently  lengthy  period  of  time  has
elapsed to warrant the exercise of  clemency.   Therefore,  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 8 June 2006, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                  Mr. Wayne R. Gracie, Panel Chair
                  Mr. John B. Hennessey, Member
                 Mr. Todd L. Schafer, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with  AFBCMR
Docket Number BC-2006-00096:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 5 Jan 06, with attachments.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, AFLSA/JAJM, dated 31 Mar 06.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Apr 06.




                                                   WAYNE R. GRACIE
                                                   Panel Chair