RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01594

			COUNSEL:  NONE

			HEARING DESIRED:  NO 


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her Dishonorable discharge be upgraded to Honorable.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her 6 ½ month record of service prior to the incident shows a 
spotless enlistment and she believes her characterization of 
discharge is unjustified.  

She received a Dishonorable discharge after being convicted of 
cocaine use.  

She was raised to respect God and Country and value her rights 
as a citizen.  Her addiction to drugs began prior to her 
enlistment and her hopes were to have a new life, serving her 
country.  She accepts full responsibility for all of her actions 
and has used these experiences to now help others.  

She struggled for many years with drug addiction and has been 
clean and sober for more than a decade.  She lives her life 
giving back to the community and helping others.  She believes 
that drug addiction is an illness that one can recover from and 
she pleads to the Board consider her upgrade.  

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 23 Nov 
87.

On 4 Apr 89, the applicant was convicted in a General Court-
Martial of two violations of Article 112a, wrongfully use of 
cocaine and distribution of cocaine.  She was also found guilty 
of one violation of Article 134, wrongfully and unlawfully 
making and subscribing under lawful oath a false statement.  She 
was sentenced to a dishonorable discharge, confinement for two 
years, forfeiture of all pay and allowances and reduction to 
airman basic.

On 8 Mar 90, the applicant was furnished a Dishonorable 
discharge, and was credited with 1 year and 6 days of active 
service.   

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of 
primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C.    


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFLOA/JAJM recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of 
an error or an injustice.  The applicant does not claim any 
error of law or fact was made, but rather asks the Board to 
consider her "11 plus years sober" and giving back to the 
community.

It should be noted that the relief cannot be accomplished 
administratively. Also, the application is not timely, as it was 
filed outside of the three year time frame for applications.  
The applicant was tried by general court-martial convened at 
Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama from 28-29 November 1988.  A 
panel of officer members found the applicant, contrary to her 
pleas, guilty of cocaine use, in violation of Article 112a, 
Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), cocaine distribution, 
in violation of Article 112a, UCMJ, and wrongfully making a 
false statement under oath, in violation of Article 134, UCMJ.  
The same panel of officer members sentenced the applicant to be 
dismissed with a dishonorable discharge, confinement for 2 
years, reduction in grade to E-1, and forfeiture of all pay and 
allowances. 

On 4 April 1989, the convening authority approved the sentence 
as adjudged. 

On 14 June 1989, the United States Court of Military Appeals 
(USCMA) determined that the findings and sentence were correct 
in law and fact. 

On 2 February 1990, the Air Force Clemency and Parole Board 
(AFCPB) approved parole for the applicant contingent upon 
participation in a community-based substance abuse program with 
mandatory urinalysis screening as directed by a designated 
parole officer. 

On 13 December 1990, the AFCPB directed a warrant for the 
applicant's return to military control and confinement based 
upon three positive tests for cocaine and one for Valium 
subsequent to the applicant's parole.

A complete copy of the AFLOA/JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant contends that all other airmen involved in this 
case were administratively discharged in exchange for their 
testimony against her.  She submits that the truth of the 
incident was that four individuals went out together for an 
evening on the town and ignorantly went in four ways to 
purchase a half a gram of cocaine.  She, in no way, was a 
distributor.  She had nothing to do with the distribution, have 
never distributed, only used for a period that became an 
addiction.  Again, she has been in recovery for 12 years.

She believes that she deserves a chance to have her discharge 
upgraded, not being labeled “Dishonorable” for the remainder of 
her life.


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 an error or injustice.  We note 
that 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.  We find no evidence which indicates the applicant’s 
service characterization, which had its basis in her court-
martial conviction and was a part of the sentence of the 
military court, was improper or that it exceeded the limitations 
set forth in the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).  We 
have considered the applicant’s overall quality of service, the 
court-martial conviction which precipitated the discharge, and 
the seriousness of the offenses to which convicted.  However, we 
do not find the evidence presented is sufficient for us to 
conclude that the applicant’s post-service activities overcome 
the misconduct for which she was discharged.  Therefore, in the 
absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to 
recommend granting the relief sought. 





THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the 
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2014-01594 in Executive Session on 7 Apr 15 under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2014-01594 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 Apr 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 13 Jun 14.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Sep 14.
	Exhibit E.  Applicant’s Letter, dated 26 Oct 14.