RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2016-01461 

						COUNSEL: 

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, Item 24, Character of Service, be changed to reflect Honorable.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her AF IMT Form 100, Request and Authorization for Separation, Item 14, Character of Service, indicates Honorable.

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 23 Mar 10, with an Expiration of Term of Service (ETS) of 22 Mar 14.

On 21 Nov 12, the applicant was furnished a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge, and was credited with 2 years, 7 months, and 29 days of active service.

AF IMT Form 100, Request and Authorization for Separation, identified as Special Order AF-095601, is dated 5 Jun 12, prior to the applicant’s disciplinary actions and recommendation for administrative discharge.

AF IMT Form 973, Request and Authorization for Change of Administrative Orders, dated 6 Sep 12, rescinds Special Order AF-095601 (AF IMT Form 100).

On 5 Nov 12, the applicant’s commander notified the applicant, he was going to recommend her for a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge, for minor disciplinary infractions.  

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility, which is attached at Exhibit C.  

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DP2STM recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice.  

The Master Personnel Records clearly show that both the commander and discharge authority directed a General (Under Honorable Conditions) service characterization.  Both the commander and discharge authority determined that the multiple acts of misconduct committed by the applicant outweighed any positive aspects of the applicant’s brief military career.

The applicant contends that her separation order, AF IMT Form 100, indicates the honorable service characterization.  The applicant is correct that the separation orders are marked honorable; however, those orders are in error.  There is no need to amend the separation order to correct this error since the DD Form 214 is the permanent source document and it reflects the correct characterization. 

A complete copy of the AFPC/DP2STM 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 16 May 17 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D).  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 agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error.  However, the Board notes the applicant specifically focused her request on the perceived error in her record and not on the possibility the discharge was an injustice.  Should the applicant believe her discharge was unjust, the Board wants the applicant to know that she has another administrative avenue available before coming to this Board – the Discharge Review Board.  After exhausting the available avenue of administrative relief, you may request reconsideration from the Board.  Your reconsideration request must include official documentary evidence that indicates the results of the administrative review.  Without such additional evidence, reconsideration by the Board is not possible.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief.  

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-2016-01461 in Executive Session on 7 Nov 17 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2016-01461 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 9 Aug 16, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Excerpts from Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DP2STM, dated 17 Aug 16.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 16 May 17.
	
Pursuant to paragraph 1 of AFI 36-2603 (Title 32 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 865.1), it is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled matter.