SECOND ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBERS:	BC-2007-00960 COUNSEL: None
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX	HEARING DESIRED:	YES

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
1.	Her general court-martial be set-aside.
2.	Her	DD	Forms	214	be	corrected	to	reflect	an	honorable characterization of service.

3.	Her date entered active duty be changed to 3 February 1981 rather than 3 September 1981.

4.	Her	excess	leave	of	1,026	days	be	changed	to	active	duty military time as she does not want leave.

RESUME OF CASE:
On 13 December 2007 and 1 June 2009, the Board considered and denied the applicant’s requests to upgrade her Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) to honorable, grant a medical discharge, or a medical retirement. For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s separation; and, the rationale of the earlier decisions by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings (ROP) at Exhibit F and the Addendum to Record of Proceedings at Exhibit H.

On	17	January	2012,	the	applicant	submitted	a	request	for	
reconsideration	to	set-aside	her	court-martial,	upgrade	her	
discharge to honorable, change her date entered active duty to
3 February 1981, and change her 1,026 days of excess leave to active duty time.

In support of her appeal, the applicant provides as new evidence a personal statement, dated 17 July 2010, and a Department of Veteran Affairs (DVA) decision, dated 20 December 2011.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit I.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1.	In earlier findings, the Board determined that there was insufficient evidence to warrant any corrective action. After thoroughly reviewing the additional documentation submitted in support of her appeal and the evidence of record, we do not find the applicant has overcome the rationale expressed in our previous decisions. However, since no new and relevant evidence has been provided, we find the request does not meet the criteria for reconsideration. As the applicant has been previously advised, reconsideration is provided only where newly discovered relevant evidence is presented which was not available when the application was submitted. Further, the reiteration of facts we have previously addressed, uncorroborated personal observations, or additional arguments on the evidence of record are not adequate grounds for reopening a case. Therefore, in view of the above, and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis upon which to reconsider the applicant’s request.

2.	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 issues 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 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2007-00960 in Executive Session on 16 October 2012, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, Panel Chair XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, Member XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, Member

2

The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2007-00960:

Exhibit F.	ROP, dtd 25 Jan 08, w/Exhibits A through E. Exhibit H.	Addendum to ROP, dated 18 Jun 09, w/Exhibit G. Exhibit I.	DD Form 149, dated 17 Jan 12, w/atchs.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Panel Chair