RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:				DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-04059
								INDEX CODE:  106.00
								COUNSEL:  NONE

								HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her discharge was unfair and unjust, and she was not given a fair trial.  She did not have the proper guidance or counsel, and there were people testifying against her who committed perjury and did not work with her.  At the time of this injustice, she worked in the Orderly Room, had seen this happen to others, and felt there was no hope.

Prior to her discharge, her record was without incident.  Her problems began when she complained about racial jokes within the office that were told in her presence.  Once she complained, she was singled-out, and then forced-out.  On several occasions, she was pushed to the edge to defend herself.  She made a few hasty decisions due to the undue pressure on her at that time, and most of the decisions were due to personality conflicts with those who brought charges against her.  

Since her discharge, she has become a nurse and a productive citizen.  She has never had a problem with law enforcement officials and has raised three children.

In support of her appeal, she has submitted a copy of a DD Form 293, Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of the United States.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:     

The applicant entered the Regular Air Force (RegAF) on 15 February 1983, and served as an administrative specialist until her discharge.  

On 2 May 1986, the applicant was notified of her commander's intent to recommend her for a general discharge for minor disciplinary infractions.  The commander stated the following reasons for the proposed discharge:         

a.	Letter of Counseling (LOC), dated 25 July 1984, for, on or about 2 July 1984, failing to show for a dental appointment.

b.	LOC, dated 14 May 1985, for a speeding ticket (31 MPH in a 25 MPH zone). 

c.	LOC, dated 14 August 1985, for, on or about 13 August 1985, dereliction of duty for failing to properly fill out the Log Book, and for disrespect to a Non-Commissioned Officer (NCO) by copying their words and mocking what was said.

d.	LOC, dated 22 August 1985, for, on or about 21 August 1985, failing to maintain housing standards of the outside area of her on-base living quarters.

e.	Letter of Reprimand (LOR), dated 14 November 1985, for, on or about 14 November 1985, wearing her military sweater without the appropriate rank, and for insubordination to an NCO by stating “No, I don’t think so.” when told to remove her sweater.

f.	Memo for Record for, on or about 21 November 1985, being disrespectful to an officer by humming and standing in a very lackadaisical manner while being read her denial of reenlistment paperwork, and for displaying the same mannerisms and chewing gum while being verbally counseled by her first sergeant.

g.	LOR, dated 10 January 1986, for, on or about 9 January 1986, being disrespectful to an NCO by ignoring a request to return to the Orderly Room after being asked to do so on three occasions.

h.	Special Court-Martial on 16 April 1986, for failure to go.  Applicant was found guilty and sentenced to a reduction to the grade of airman (E-2), forfeiture of $300.00 per month for one month, and restriction to the base for 30 days.

The commander advised the applicant of her rights, and, on 2 May 1986, after consulting with counsel, she waived her right to submit statements in her own behalf.

A legal review was conducted, and in an undated memorandum, the staff judge advocate recommended the applicant be separated with a general discharge, without probation and rehabilitation, and that she be issued a debarment letter due to her continued disrespect for military authority.

On 13 May 1986, the applicant was discharged in the grade of airman (E-2) for misconduct – pattern of minor disciplinary infractions, under the provisions of AFR 39-10, paragraph 5-46, with a general (under honorable conditions) service characterization.  She served a total of 3 years, 2 months, and 29 days of total active service.

The applicant’s Airman Performance Report (APR) profile follows:

		PERIOD ENDING				EVALUATION

		 14 Feb 1984					7
		 23 Jan 1985					8
		 23 Jan 1986					7

Her records indicate she is entitled to wear the Air Force Training Ribbon.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Clarksburg, WV, indicated at Exhibit C that they were unable to identify an arrest record on the basis of the information furnished.  

On 1 February 2008, a request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant for response within 30 days.  However, 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.  We took notice of the applicant's complete submission 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’s contentions are noted; however, she has not provided evidence to support these contentions or 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.  We considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient to compel us to recommend granting the relief sought on that basis.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis upon which to recommend granting the relief sought.

________________________________________________________________

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 Docket Number BC-2007-04059 in Executive Session on 13 March 2008, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 20 Dec 07, w/atch.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Available Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  USDOJ Negative FBI Report, dated 18 Jan 08.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 1 Feb 08, w/atchs.