RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: 00-01346
            INDEX NUMBER:  105.00; 106.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The sentence she received at court-martial be changed on the  basis
of clemency.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She has been prejudiced against since confinement  because  no  one
could correctly compute her sentence to confinement.  She was  told
she was not eligible for parole because her sentence to confinement
of 8 years included a 5-year period of  confinement  based  on  her
inability to pay  the  fine.   In  December  1995,  the  Air  Force
Clemency and Parole Board determined that  her  parole  eligibility
date was 23 December 1996.  Since the correction was not made until
a year after her arrival at the United States Disciplinary Barracks
(USDB), Fort Leavenworth, KS,  it  affected  her  participation  in
crime-specific treatment and the projected date of her elevation to
trustee custody.   She  was  given  a  date  of  October  1996  for
elevation to trustee status, since her crime-specific  group  would
not be completed until July 1996.  In October,  she  was  told  she
could not be elevated in  custody  because  she  was  considered  a
flight risk.  The reasons cited were the length  of  her  sentence;
her mother’s poor health; and the fact  that  she  pled  guilty  to
larceny in the amount of approximately $350,000, most of which  was
still unaccounted for.

She has been a minimum custody inmate since February 1996, and  she
has not been considered for custody elevation since then.  She  has
not had a job detail, which would credit her with  work  abatement,
since January 1999, because she was told she could not receive good
conduct time or work abatement for the period of confinement served
because of her  inability  to  pay  the  fine.   She  has  been  in
confinement over 6 years and the USDB still does not  know  how  to
compute her sentence to confinement or her good conduct time.   She
feels her civil rights have been violated.

In  a  letter  dated  18  October  2000,  the  applicant   provided
additional  information.   In  it,  she  reiterated   her   earlier
contentions and added that she was credited with the correct amount
of good conduct time by the USDB prior to her transfer to  Miramar.
Her new minimum release date is 8 October 2002; however,  Miramar’s
records do not reflect  the  correct  minimum  release  date.   All
female inmates  from  the  USDB  were  transferred  to  Miramar  in
September 2000.  The Navy requires all inmates to work, but they do
not  authorize  extra  good  conduct  time  in  the  form  of  work
abatement.   Air  Force  male  inmates  in  Army  and   Air   Force
confinement facilities receive extra good conduct  time  for  work.
Male inmates at the USDB receive a deduction of 5 days  each  month
for work abatement in addition to  receiving  pay  for  work.   She
feels she is entitled to some form of clemency because she has been
prejudiced against.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 19 August 1994, the applicant, then a master sergeant in the Air
Force, with  over  15  years  of  active  service,  was  tried  and
convicted at a general court-martial of 5 specifications of larceny
of government property and 5 specifications of  related  conspiracy
to commit larceny.  In total, she was found guilty of  larceny  and
conspiracy to commit larceny of $500,957.64  in  government  funds.
The court sentenced her to a  dishonorable  discharge,  confinement
for 8 years, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, reduction to  E-
1, and $175,000 fine or confinement for five  additional  years  if
the fine was  not  paid.   The  convening  authority  approved  the
findings and the sentence on 16 November 1994.   On  15  May  1995,
that portion of the sentence that provided for a $175,000 fine  was
remitted and the additional confinement of 5 years was ordered into
execution.  The sentence was affirmed by GCMO #15, dated 18 October
1996.   The  applicant  was  initially  incarcerated  at  the  Army
Mannheim Confinement Facility, a short-term  holding  and  transfer
facility.  She was received at the USDB in May 1995.  In  September
2000, she was transferred to the Naval Consolidated  Brig,  Miramar
Naval Air Station (NAS), San Diego, CA.  In December 2000, the  Air
Force Clemency and Parole Board approved parole.  She was  released
on parole from the Naval  Consolidated  Brig  on  9  January  2001.
Unless  parole  is  suspended  or  revoked  for  violation  of  the
conditions of parole or, her sentence to confinement  is  decreased
or terminated as a result  of  clemency,  her  parole  status  will
expire on 24 April 2007.

The  remaining  relevant  facts  pertaining  to  this  application,
extracted from  the  applicant’s  records,  are  contained  in  the
official documents at Exhibit B and in the letters prepared by  the
appropriate office of the Air Force.  Accordingly, there is no need
to recite these facts in this Record of Proceedings.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

The Chief,  Clemency,  Corrections  and  Officer  Review  Division,
AFLSA/JAJR, reviewed the application  and  stated  that  while  the
AFBCMR does have the authority to correct the record  of  a  court-
martial for purposes of clemency, he believes it  should  heed  the
exhaustion of other administrative remedies  while  relief  by  the
Clemency  and  Parole  Board  remains  a  reasonable   possibility.
Although the Clemency and Parole Board  has  denied  the  applicant
clemency on each of 6 occasions and parole on 5, that does not mean
such relief is no longer a realistic  possibility.   The  applicant
has served less than half  of  her  full  term  of  confinement  of
13 years.  Her maximum release  date  is  24  April  2007  and  her
minimum release date, which takes into account the good conduct and
extra good conduct abatement with which she has been  credited,  is
8 October 2002.  Before she reaches her minimum release  date,  she
will be considered at least 2 more times for clemency and parole.

Turning to  the  merits  of  the  application,  assuming  that  the
corrections staff at the USDB miscalculated her parole  eligibility
date  and  good  time  credit,  there  is  no  showing  that  those
miscalculations delayed the applicant’s ability to achieve  trustee
status, and consequently deprived her of a fair opportunity  to  be
paroled.

If they further assume such miscalculations deprived the  applicant
of the opportunity to earn extra good time and delayed her  ability
to  complete  crime-specific  treatment,  there  is   likewise   no
indication that either of those factors  deprived  her  of  a  fair
opportunity to be paroled.

Finally, AFLSA/JAJR found no merit  to  the  applicant’s  complaint
that she is a victim  of  prejudice  because  of  her  transfer  to
Miramar, where she is unable to earn extra good  conduct  abatement
credit on her sentence to confinement.   Unlike  the  Army  at  the
USDB, the Navy does not authorize extra good time abatement  credit
at its confinement facilities.  Air Force prisoners transferred  to
Navy confinement facilities are bound by Navy corrections policies.
 This policy applies equally to male and female inmates.

A  complete  copy  of  the  evaluation,  with  attachments,  is  at
Exhibit C.

The Associate General Counsel, SAF/GCM, responded to  the  AFBCMR’s
request for an opinion concerning the jurisdiction of the AFBCMR to
grant clemency, in the form of a reduced sentence  to  confinement,
to applicants who are military  prisoners  servicing  sentences  to
confinement adjudged by  a  court-martial.   Their  opinion  is  at
Exhibit D, with attachment.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

The applicant disagreed with AFLSA/JAJR’s statement concerning  the
reason she was denied elevation to trustee status, stating that the
primary reason she was considered a flight risk was that she had to
serve the additional 5 years day for day with no  credit  for  good
conduct  time  or  work  abatement,  not  because  the  money   was
unaccounted for.  Furthermore, she submitted documents to the  USDB
indicating that her co-conspirator made restitution in  the  amount
of $259,000 and she also made restitution.  She does not feel  that
she can realistically expect any type of relief from  the  Clemency
and Parole Board.

The  applicant’s  complete  response,  with  attachments,   is   at
Exhibit F.

___________________________________________________________________

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

In response to the AFBCMR’s request for review and comments on  the
applicant’s rebuttal, the Chief, Clemency, Corrections and  Officer
Review Division, AFLSA/JAJR, reiterated his earlier  recommendation
to deny the application.  He added that the applicant was  released
on parole on 9 January 2001.  Her  parole  status  will  expire  on
24 April 2007.

Responding to the applicant’s allegations concerning the amount  of
money that has not been accounted for and the amount of restitution
she has made, as a condition of parole, the applicant  submitted  a
restitution plan in  which  she  acknowledged  that  she  owed  the
government $324,400.65.  She promised that she would pay $100  each
month or 10% of her monthly income, whichever is greater, until she
has reimbursed the government the entire sum she owes.

A  complete  copy  of  the  evaluation,  with  attachments,  is  at
Exhibit G.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the additional evaluation was forwarded to the  applicant
on 8  February  2001,  for  review  and  response  within  30  days
(Exhibit H).  As of this date, she has not responded.

___________________________________________________________________

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  probable  error  or  injustice.   The
comments of the Chief, Clemency,  Corrections  and  Officer  Review
Division, are supported by the evidence  of  record.   We  find  no
evidence of error in this case and after thoroughly  reviewing  the
documentation that has been submitted in support of the applicant's
appeal, we do not believe  she  has  suffered  from  an  injustice.
Therefore, based on the evidence of record, we find no  basis  upon
which to favorably consider this application.

___________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of probable 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  this  application
in Executive Session on 8 May 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:

                 Mr. Teddy L. Houston, Panel Chair
                 Mr. John L. Robuck, Member
                 Mr. Edward H. Parker, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 11 May 2000, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFLSA/JAJR, dated 28 Nov 2000, w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/GCM, dated 20 Nov 2000, w/atch.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 4 Dec 2000.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated 22 Dec 2000, w/atchs.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, AFLSA/JAJR, dated 31 Jan 2001, w/atchs.
    Exhibit H.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 8 Feb 2001.




                                   TEDDY L. HOUSTON
                                   Panel Chair