RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01542
		INDEX CODE:  110.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her general under honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

All the time she served was without incident and included some outstanding achievements.  Her discharge resulted from one careless remark she made to her officer in charge (OIC) regarding her noncommissioned officer (NCO) supervisor at a time when she was under extreme personal stress.

In support of the appeal, applicant submitted a personal statement.

Applicant's complete submission, with attachment, at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 22 April 1977.  She was progressively promoted to the grade of airman first class and received four Airman Performance Reports in which the overall evaluations were 7, 7, 8 and 5.

On 7 December 1979, the commander notified the applicant that he was recommending a general discharge for her defective attitude and apathy.  Reasons for the action were:  Numerous incidents of substandard performance and conduct.  Most of the incidents were for failure to report to her place of duty and leaving her duty station without permission.  She received letters of reprimand on 7 December 1978, 5 March 1979, 2 August 1979, and 8 November 1979; letters of counseling on 10 December 1978 and 4 April 1979; dishonorable check notifications, 15 and 16 November 1978, and 19 June 1979; letter of admonishment, 29 November 1977; and Article 15s on 6 September 1977 and 1 November 1979.  An evaluation officer interviewed her and determined the applicant was unsuitable for further military service due to her defective attitude.  He concurred with the commander’s recommendation and did not feel she was a suitable candidate for rehabilitation.  He recommended a general discharge.  Applicant submitted a statement in her own behalf requesting an honorable discharge stating her problems were due to the turmoil in her personal life.  The base legal services reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient to support the discharge.  They recommended a general discharge without probation and rehabilitation (P&R).  The Discharge Authority approved the separation and ordered a general discharge without P&R on 8 January 1980.

On 11 January 1980, the applicant was discharged under honorable conditions because of unsuitability.  She had served 2 years, 8 months and 20 days on active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS states that they believe 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.  Therefore, they recommend denial of the applicant’s request.

A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 12 September 2003, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and response 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.  Evidence has not been presented that would lead us to believe that the applicant’s discharge was erroneous or unjust.  The record indicates that discharge proceedings were initiated against the applicant based on her commission of numerous infractions against the good order and discipline of the service.  The applicant has provided no evidence that the information in the discharge case file is erroneous, that her substantial rights were violated or that her commanders abused their discretionary authority.  In the absence of such evidence or a showing that her service was inappropriately characterized, we have no basis on which to favorably consider her 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, BC-2003-01542, in Executive Session on 16 October 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 1 Aug 03, w/atch.
	Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.	Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 5 Sep 03.
	Exhibit D.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 Sep 03.

					
					Panel Chair