RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01508 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. 2. Her narrative reason for separation of “Misconduct – Drug Abuse” be removed. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The type and reason of her discharge was unjust. She was implicated in a base drug bust and accused of drug misconduct. She consented to a police/dog search of her dormitory room (clean search) and submitted to drug tests (negative results). She was demoted from airman first class (E-3) to airman (E-2). Prior to the drug bust, she was medically disqualified from her position as an aerospace physiologist technician. She was approved for retraining as a flight surgeon assistant and was doing on-the-job-training until a slot opened; however, her retraining was cancelled. She requested a discharge due to the embarrassment of being demoted and the cancellation of her technical school. In support of her appeal, the applicant provides a copy of her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Activity Duty. The applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 24 Jun 87, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force. On 14 Dec 88, the applicant was notified of her commander’s intent to recommend she be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Administrative Separation of Airmen for a commission of a serious offense, specifically, drug abuse. The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge and after consulting with counsel, waived her right to submit a statement on her own behalf. For a full accounting of the offenses, see the commander’s notification letter at Exhibit B. By undated letter, the 71st Air Base Group Staff Judge Advocate (71 ABG/JA) reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient to support discharge and recommended the applicant receive a general (under honorable conditions) discharge without the offer of probation or rehabilitation. On 20 Dec 88, the discharge authority approved the applicant’s discharge. On 22 Dec 88, the applicant was discharged for Misconduct – Drug Abuse with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions) in the grade of airman. On 24 Feb 93, the applicant submitted a DD Form 293, Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States asking for upgrade. On 14 Oct 93, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s appeal for upgrade of her discharge to honorable. The AFDRB found that neither the evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant substantiated an inequity or impropriety which would justify a change of discharge. On 16 Dec 93, the applicant was notified of the AFDRB’s decision. In a letter dated, 7 Nov 13, the applicant was offered an opportunity to provide information pertaining to her activities since leaving the service (Exhibit C). As of this date, this office has not received a response. _________________________________________________________________ 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. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we find no evidence of an error or injustice that occurred in the discharge processing. Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and within the commander's discretionary authority. The applicant has provided no evidence which would lead us to believe the characterization of the service was contrary to the provisions of the governing regulation, unduly harsh, or disproportionate to the offenses committed. In addition, we also find no basis to remove the narrative reason for separation of Drug Abuse from her records. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the characterization of the applicant’s discharge based on clemency; however, after considering her overall record of service, the infractions which led to her administrative separation and lack of post-service documentation, we are not persuaded that an upgrade is warranted. In view of the above and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis upon which 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-01508 in Executive Session on 27 Jan 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 Mar 13, w/atch. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 7 Nov 13. Panel Chair