RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-01248

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED: NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her punishment was too harsh and the discharge should have been enough (Exhibit A).

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 27 July 1989, applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force.  Her highest grade held was senior airman (SrA/E-4).  Applicant’s grade at time of discharge was airman first class (A1C/E-3).

On 5 Dec 91, applicant was disrespectful to her supervisor and walked out of a meeting without being dismissed.  She received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR).

On 26 Oct 93, applicant was derelict in the performance of her duties by not reviewing an order placed in the computer system and obligated the government for $45,462.84, when she should have only ordered $7000 worth of products, along with the expense of transporting the products to other locations.  On 12 Nov 93, Troop Support operations received three pallets of tomato paste, well above the normal requirement.  On 17 Nov 93, two trucks arrived with 42 pallets and on 18 Nov 93, a truck with 23 more pallets arrived, and applicant never informed management of the problem.  Applicant received a Record of Individual Counseling (RIC) for these offenses.

Between on or about 20 Mar – 9 Apr 94, applicant wrote five checks totaling $56.85 to Domino’s Pizza, and failed to maintain sufficient funds in her account to pay them in full.  She was given a Letter of Reprimand (LOR), which was placed in an Unfavorable Information File (UIF).

On or about 4 Oct 94, applicant, with intent to defraud and for the procurement of lawful currency, wrongfully and unlawfully made and uttered a $50 check knowing that she did not have sufficient funds in her account to pay the check.  Applicant was given an Article 15, with a reduction in grade to airman first class (A1C/E-3) for this misconduct.

The applicant received another Letter of Reprimand on or about 13 Oct 94, when she wrote a check in the amount of $50 and again failed to maintain sufficient funds in her account to make payment in full.  She received a LOR for this offense.

Between on or about 1 Nov 94 – 15 Dec 94, applicant was derelict in the performance of her duties when she failed to properly complete the Store Block Control Journal for the ending inventory for Oct 94 and beginning inventory for Nov 94.  For this offense she received a Letter of Counseling.

On 19 Jan 95, the squadron commander initiated administrative discharge action against the applicant for a pattern of misconduct (discreditable involvement with military and civilian authorities). The bases for the proposed discharge action were the incidents of misconduct cited above.  Applicant acknowledged receipt of the discharge notification on the same date.  On 20 Jan 95, after consulting with counsel and having been advised of her rights, she notified the commander of her intent to submit statements to the separation authority.  On 30 Jan 95, applicant submitted documents in her own behalf.  On 1 Feb 95, the Staff Judge Advocate found the case legally sufficient and recommended that the applicant be separated with an under honorable conditions (general) discharge without probation or rehabilitation (P&R).  On 3 Feb 95, the discharge authority approved a general discharge, without P&R.

On 6 Feb 95, applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFI 36-3203, with service characterized as under honorable conditions (general).  She was credited with 5 years, 6 months, and 10 days of active service.

Applicant appeared and testified before the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) on 22 Mar 01.  They concluded that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority and that the applicant was provided full administrative due process (See AFDRB Hearing Record at Exhibit B).

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS reviewed this application and recommended denial.  They found that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  Additionally, that the discharge was within the sound discretion of the discharge authority.  They also noted that the applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.  Accordingly, they recommended her records remain the same and her request be denied.  

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 10 May 02 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

___________________________________________________________________

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.  After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant's submission, the discharge appears to be in compliance with the governing AFI and we find no evidence to indicate that her separation from the Air Force was inappropriate.  We find no evidence of error in this case and after thoroughly reviewing the documentation that has been submitted in support of applicant's appeal, we do not believe she has suffered from an injustice.  Therefore, based on the evidence of record, we find no basis upon which to favorably consider this application.

___________________________________________________________________

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 this application AFBCMR Docket Number 02-01248 in Executive Session on 11 July 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 1 Apr 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 26 Apr 02.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 May 02, w/atchs.