RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-00361 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be upgraded to a General discharge. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Her discharge was inequitable because it was based upon one isolated incident in 28 months of service with no other adverse action. She made an error in judgment and feels the punishment was far too harsh. Since leaving the military, she has been a productive member of society and has dedicated her life to serving the public. She worked as an Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) and field training instructor of four years, ambulance and 911-dispatcher for a combined total of six years, taught as a chef instructor at the collegiate level for two years, and is currently serving as a Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) which she has for 3 years, mostly with the Veteran’s Administration. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 3 Sep 86. On 8 Apr 89, the applicant was sentenced to a Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) and was reduced to the grade of Airman Basic after being found guilty at a General Court-Martial of violating Article 112A of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCJM), specifically, between on or about 17 Nov 88 and 22 Nov 88, she wrongfully used cocaine. On 19 Jul 90, the applicant was furnished a BCD, with a Narrative Reason for Separation of “Conviction by Court-Martial (Other Than Deserter),” after completing 3 years, 10 months, and 17 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 punishment adjudged by the convening authority was within the range of permissible punishments. There is no evidence the applicant was not afforded all her appellate rights. In accordance with 10 USC 1552(f), the Board has no authority to overturn the court-martial conviction but may only correct the actions taken by the reviewing authorities, i.e., the sentence, on the basis of clemency. Despite the documents the applicant submitted, there is no new evidence that would negate the crimes she committed, nor bring into question the appropriateness of the sentence. A complete copy of the AFLOA/JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In further support of her request, the applicant submitted the requested FBI Report which indicates no record of arrests (Exhibit F). 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 an error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission, to include her rebuttal response to the advisory opinion, 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 the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, the applicant submitted insufficient documentation related to her post-service activities to determine if her accomplishments since leaving the service are sufficiently meritorious to 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-2015-00361 in Executive Session on 8 Sep 15, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence pertaining AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-00361 was considered: Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 12 Jan 15, w/atchs. Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 28 Apr 15. Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Jun 15. Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 6 Feb 15, w/atch. Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated