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.