RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00136 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1) Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. 2) Her narrative reason for separation be changed from misconduct to one that would allow her to enter another branch of the military. 3) Her reentry code of 2B (approved involuntary separation with less than honorable discharge) be changed to allow her to enter another branch of the military. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Eight years have passed since she was discharged from the Air Force. She is sorry and ashamed for her actions. Her misconduct is not acceptable and she takes full responsibility for the actions that led to her early separation. She has moved forward and used her past experiences to become a better person. She treats others with respect and strives to do her best every day. She would like to go back to school to make a better life for her children. She would like to further her education in criminal justice and get a better job in law enforcement and/or reenlist in another branch of the military. In support of her appeal, the applicant provides a personal statement, a copy of her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, several reference letters and other supporting documentation. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 20 January 1999. On 24 April 2002, the applicant was notified of her commander’s intent to discharge her from the Air Force for minor disciplinary infractions. Specifically, the applicant received an Article 15, four Letters of Reprimand, two Records of Individual Counseling and an Unfavorable Information File. The applicant acknowledged her right to consult counsel and submit matters; which she did on 24 April 2002. The case was found legally sufficient on 2 May 2002. On 3 May 2002, the separation authority approved the discharge and directed she be separated from the Air Force with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge, under the provisions of Air Force Instruction 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, without probation and rehabilitation. Her narrative reason for separation was misconduct. Her reentry code was listed as 2B (approved involuntary separation with less than honorable discharge). She was credited with serving 3 years, 4 months and 17 days on active duty. The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied a similar request from the applicant on 11 October 2005. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial. DPSOS states the applicant’s discharge to include her characterization were consistent with procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge instruction and within the discretion of the discharge authority. The complete DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial. DPSOA states RE code 2B is required per AFI 36-2606, Reenlistments in the USAF, based on her involuntary discharge with a general character of service. Additionally, the applicant provides no evidence of error or injustice. The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states that she did not provide documentation to support her claims of unfair treatment in her original request. She has provided additional documentation to support her request. Additionally, she noticed several supporting documents missing from her discharge package. She feels this placed her at an extreme disadvantage and severely impacted her commander’s decision to discharge her from the Air Force. The applicant’s complted response is at Exhibit F. _____________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. 2. The application was timely filed. 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 during the discharge process. 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, or unduly harsh. We also note the applicant’s contention of unfair treatment and the claim that documents were removed from her discharge package prior to the wing commanders review; however, there was no evidence presented to support this allegation. We considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, there was no evidence submitted 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-2011-00136 in Executive Session on 19 July 2011 and 18 August 2011, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number BC-2011-00136 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 3 Dec 10. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 20 Apr 11. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated, 16 May 11. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Jun 11. Exhibit F. Letter, Applicant’s response, dated 12 Jul 11. Panel Chair