RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-03015 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her general (under honorable conditions) be upgraded to honorable. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She believes she made a mistake under duress. She was not able to sleep well after being sexually harassed during her clinical rotation at Bethesda Naval Base. Instead of asking for help from others, she turned to her boyfriend who believed it was her fault that she was in this situation so he hit her. It was at that point she began taking Valium and Percodan. She is more mature, with the assistance from a doctor and is able to handle her problem without breaking the law. She is a single mother who has become a dependable and productive citizen. Additionally, she has a good job with benefits, but cannot afford dental insurance. In support of her request, the applicant provides a copy of her Benefits Statement and copies of her pretreatment estimates. Her complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant enlisted into the Regular Air Force on 28 Dec 90. The applicant was convicted by a special court-martial for the following charges: Charge I, Article 80: Specification: She did, at Andrews Air Force Base, Maryland, on or about 5 Oct 92, attempt to steal diazepam (Valium) a value of less than $100.00. She pled guilty and was found guilty of this charge. Charge II, Article 112a: Specification 1: On divers occasions between on or about 11 Aug 92 and on or about 5 Oct 92, she wrongfully possessed some amount of oxycodone HCL (Percodan) a schedule II controlled substance and diazepam (Valium) a schedule IV controlled substance. She pled guilty and was found guilty of this charge. Charge III, Article 121: Specification: On divers occasions between on or about 11 Aug 92 and 5 Oct 92, she stole diazepam (Valium), oxycodone (Percodan), ibuprofen (Motrin), and naproxen (Naprosyn) a value of less than $100.00. She pled guilty and was found guilty of this charge. On 11 Mar 93, the applicant was sentenced to confinement for three months, forfeited $500.00 pay per month for three months, and was reduced to the grade of E-2. The sentence was adjudged on the same day. The applicant’s commander recommended her for discharge under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Chapter, 5, Paragraphs 5-49 and 5- 51. She received a general discharge on 25 Jun 93 after serving 2 years, 5 months, and 28 days on active duty. ________________________________________________________________ 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 her service was contrary to the provisions of the governing regulation, unduly harsh, or disproportionate to the offenses committed. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient to compel us to recommend granting the relief sought on that basis. Therefore, 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-2013-03015 in Executive Session on 27 Feb 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 Jun 13, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 1 2