RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:		DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00398
				COUNSEL:  NONE
	                       		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The applicant does not provide any contentions or assertions as 
to why she feels her discharge characterization is in error or 
unjust.  

In support of her appeal, the applicant provides copies of her 
discharge notification memorandum and her response.  

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

________________________________________________________________
_

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force who 
entered active duty on 29 November 2005.  

The applicant received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR), dated 
9 February 2009, for failing her Physical Training (PT) test; a 
Letter of Reprimand (LOR), dated 2 February 2009, for failing to 
go to PT and failure to obey; a Letter of Counseling (LOC), 
dated 9 December 2008, for failure to go to PT; a suspended 
punishment from an Article 15 vacated for underage drinking; an 
Article 15 for wrongfully discussing an investigation with 
another individual; a notification of promotion withholding for 
failure to meet Air Force physical fitness standards; and an 
LOR, dated 20 March 2008, for failing a PT test.  

On 20 April 2009, the applicant was notified of her commander’s 
intent to recommend her for a general (under honorable 
conditions) discharge under the provisions of Air Force Program 
Directive (AFPD) 36-32 and Air Force Instruction (AFI) 39-3208, 
Chapter 5, Section H, paragraph 5.49, for Misconduct: Minor 
Disciplinary Infractions.  The applicant acknowledged her 
commander’s intent, consulted counsel, and submitted a statement 
in her own behalf.  

On 30 April 2009, the discharge authority approved the 
recommended discharge and directed the applicant be furnished a 
general (under honorable conditions) discharge without probation 
or rehabilitation.  

The applicant was discharged from active duty in the grade of 
airman (E-2) effective 8 May 2009 with a general (under 
honorable conditions) discharge.  Her DD Form 214, Certificate 
of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, indicates her 
narrative reason for separation as “Misconduct.”  She served 
three years, five months, and ten days on active duty.  

________________________________________________________________
_

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial.  DPSOR states that based on the 
documentation in the master personnel records, the discharge, to 
include the applicant’s character of service, was consistent 
with the procedural and substantive requirements of the 
discharge instruction and was within the discretion of the 
discharge authority.  The applicant did not provide any evidence 
of an error or injustice that occurred in the discharge 
processing.  

The complete DPSOR 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 22 March 2013, for review and comment within 30 
days (Exhibit D).  As of this date, this office has received no 
response.

________________________________________________________________
_

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 has provided no evidence 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.  In the interest of 
justice, 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 AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2013-00398 in Executive Session on 17 October 2013, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	                , Panel Chair
	                , Member
	                , Member

The following documentary evidence was considered in connection 
with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-00398:

Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 24 Nov 12, w/atch.
Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 27 Mar 13.
Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Apr 13.
2 3 4