RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02118

			COUNSEL:  NONE

			HEARING DESIRED:  NO 


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge be upgraded 
to Honorable.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

While assigned to her first duty station, she was verbally and 
psychologically abused as well as publicly humiliated on a daily 
basis.  As a low-ranking enlisted member, she was left with no 
options to correct or rectify the problem other than to remove 
herself from the situation.  She requested an early separation 
on more than one occasion; which was denied.  The only options 
she could come up were to go Absent Without Leave (AWOL), commit 
suicide, or drink.  She chose the latter; which seemed to be the 
least of the three evils.  

In support of her request, the applicant provided a letter of 
explanation, dated 5 May 14, a copy of her DD Form 214, 
Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, two AF 
Form 31s, Airman’s Request for Early Separation/Separation Based 
on Change in Service Obligation, a copy of a Letter of Reprimand 
(LOR), dated 23 Feb 95, a copy of an AF Form 1058, Unfavorable 
Information File (UIF) Action, dated 2 Mar 95, a copy of a 
Response to her LOR, UIF/Control Roster Action, dated 28 Feb 95, 
five Character Reference Letters, an Abstract of the Narrative 
Summary of the Applicant’s Alcoholism Rehabilitation, dated 3 
Oct 95, a copy of a Certified Missouri Peer Specialist 
Certificate, dated 9 Jan 14, a copy of a Training Specialist 
Certificate, dated 16 Sep 04, and a copy of Southern Illinois 
University Carbondale Transcripts, 

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 30 Jul 
93.

On 31 Jul 95, the applicant accepted an Article 15, Nonjudicial 
Punishment, for failing to obey a lawful order, a violation of 
Article 92, of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).  She 
was reduced in grade to airman (suspended) and given 14 days 
extra duty.

On 25 Oct 95, the applicant’s was found derelict in her 
performance for failing to refrain from drinking and her 
suspended reduction in grade was vacated. 

On 31 Oct 95, the applicant was notified by her commander, she 
was being recommended for discharge for Minor Disciplinary 
Infractions pursuant to AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation 
of Airmen, Chapter 5, Section H, paragraph 5.49. 

On 2 Nov 95, the applicant consulted legal counsel and submitted 
a statement on her behalf requesting an Honorable discharge.

On 7 Nov 95, the Staff Judge Advocate found the discharge 
package legally sufficient and recommended a General (Under 
Honorable Conditions) discharge.

On 13 Nov 95, the discharge authority approved a General (Under 
Honorable Conditions) discharge without probation and 
rehabilitation.

On 17 Nov 95, the applicant was furnished a General (Under 
Honorable Conditions) discharge, and was credited with 2 years, 
3 months, and 18 days of active service.   

A request for post-service information was forwarded to the 
applicant on 1 Jul 14 for review and comment 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 an 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, in the absence of any evidence related to the 
applicant’s post-service activities, there is no way for us to 
determine if the applicant’s accomplishments since leaving the 
service are sufficiently meritorious to overcome the misconduct 
for which she was discharged. Therefore, in the absence of 
evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting 
the relief sought. 


THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the 
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2014-02118 in Executive Session on 28 Apr 15 under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2014-02118 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 4 Jun 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Clemency Information Bulletin.