RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-03518

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She joined the Air Force just five weeks into her 17th birthday.  She had never been away from her family or North Carolina up to that time.  As the Board can imagine, this led to her being very sheltered.  After boot camp, she was assigned to Kessler AFB, MS for training in the Administrative functions (70230C).  While at Kessler, she was exposed to alcohol for the first time in her life and she quickly became a problem drinker.  Her commander at Kessler arranged for her to go to Randolph AFB TX in the spring of 1980 for rehabilitation.  She first reported to her duty station, Beal AFB CA, then was quickly was shipped out to Randolph for a month.  Upon returning to Beal, she was again in an environment that was pervasive with alcohol.  Since she was 17, she wasn’t permitted to drink off the base, but on base she could drink all she wanted.  She feel strongly that the environment fostered a climate of heavy drinking.  As a result of her fall into what she would now describe as acute alcoholism, she made many poor choices in her military career.  Each of the items in her personnel file that were negative can be directly traced to alcoholism and the effect on her ability to make sound decisions.  She believes that if the environment had not fostered such lax rules around underage drinking, she would have taken another route more favorable to her military career. 

In support of her application, she submits a personal statement.

Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force as an airman basic on 19 Nov 79.  She was discharged from the Air Force on    17 Mar 82 under the provisions of AFR 39-12 (Unsuitable - Apathy Defective Attitude) with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge.  She served 2 years, 3 months and 29 days of total active duty service.  

On 22 Feb 82, the applicant’s commander notified her that he was recommending her for a general discharge for continuously displaying an apathetic and defective attitude toward her responsibilities.  Applicant was punished under Article 15,     19 Feb 82, for failure to report for duty; two Letters of Reprimand, dated 24 Aug 81 for failure to report to duty, and   13 Apr 83 for forgery with intent to defraud; and three Letters of Counseling, dated 19 Jul 81 for insufficient funds, 17 Jun 81 for substandard duty performance, and 29 May 81 for failure to follow proper leave procedures.  Two out of three airman performance reports (APRs) stated her job performance was less than satisfactory.  She was personally evaluated and interviewed by an appointed evaluation officer who recommended a discharge without probation and rehabilitation (P&R) because applicant demonstrated a poor attitude, lack of motivation to improve, and a strong desire to be separated from the Air Force.  The base legal office reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient to support the discharge.  The Discharge Authority approved her discharge and ordered a general discharge without P&R.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial and states based upon the documentation in the file the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  Additionally, the discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority.  The applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.  She provided no facts warranting an upgrade of the discharge. 

AFPC/DPPRS complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 20 Dec 02, for review and comment.  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 that failure to timely file.

3.	Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice that would warrant an upgrade of her discharge to honorable.  We agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that she has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  Evidence has not been provided which would lead us to believe that the action taken to affect her discharge from the Air Force was improper or contrary to the provisions of the governing regulations at the time; or, that the characterization of her service was based on factors other than her own misconduct.  Therefore, based on the available evidence of record, we find no compelling basis upon which to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

4.	The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issue(s) involved.  Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of a 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 Docket Number 02-03518 in Executive Session on 12 February 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	            Panel Chair
	            Member
	            Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 29 Oct 02, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.	Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, 4 Dec 02.
	Exhibit D.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 Dec 02.