RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-01248

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her punishment was too harsh and the  discharge  should  have  been
enough (Exhibit A).

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 27 July 1989, applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force.   Her
highest grade held was senior airman (SrA/E-4).  Applicant’s  grade
at time of discharge was airman first class (A1C/E-3).

On 5 Dec 91, applicant was  disrespectful  to  her  supervisor  and
walked out of a meeting without being dismissed.   She  received  a
Letter of Reprimand (LOR).

On 26 Oct 93, applicant was derelict  in  the  performance  of  her
duties by not reviewing an order placed in the computer system  and
obligated the government for $45,462.84, when she should have  only
ordered  $7000  worth  of  products,  along  with  the  expense  of
transporting the products to other locations.  On 12 Nov 93,  Troop
Support operations received three pallets  of  tomato  paste,  well
above the normal requirement.  On 17 Nov  93,  two  trucks  arrived
with 42 pallets and on 18 Nov 93, a  truck  with  23  more  pallets
arrived, and applicant never informed management  of  the  problem.
Applicant received a Record  of  Individual  Counseling  (RIC)  for
these offenses.

Between on or about 20 Mar – 9 Apr 94, applicant wrote five  checks
totaling  $56.85  to  Domino’s  Pizza,  and  failed   to   maintain
sufficient funds in her account to pay them in full.  She was given
a Letter of Reprimand (LOR), which was  placed  in  an  Unfavorable
Information File (UIF).

On or about 4 Oct 94, applicant, with intent to defraud and for the
procurement of lawful currency, wrongfully and unlawfully made  and
uttered a $50 check knowing that she did not have sufficient  funds
in her account to pay the check.  Applicant was  given  an  Article
15, with a reduction in grade to airman first class  (A1C/E-3)  for
this misconduct.

The applicant received another Letter  of  Reprimand  on  or  about
13 Oct 94, when she wrote a check in the amount of  $50  and  again
failed to maintain sufficient funds in her account to make  payment
in full.  She received a LOR for this offense.

Between on or about 1 Nov 94 – 15 Dec 94, applicant was derelict in
the performance of her duties when she failed to properly  complete
the Store Block Control Journal for the ending inventory for Oct 94
and beginning inventory for Nov 94.  For this offense she  received
a Letter of Counseling.

On 19 Jan  95,  the  squadron  commander  initiated  administrative
discharge action against the applicant for a pattern of  misconduct
(discreditable involvement with military and civilian authorities).
The bases for the proposed discharge action were the  incidents  of
misconduct cited above.   Applicant  acknowledged  receipt  of  the
discharge notification on the same  date.   On  20  Jan  95,  after
consulting with counsel and having been advised of her rights,  she
notified the commander of her intent to submit  statements  to  the
separation authority.  On 30 Jan 95, applicant submitted  documents
in her own behalf.  On 1 Feb 95, the Staff Judge Advocate found the
case legally sufficient  and  recommended  that  the  applicant  be
separated with an under honorable  conditions  (general)  discharge
without probation or  rehabilitation  (P&R).   On  3  Feb  95,  the
discharge authority approved a general discharge, without P&R.

On 6 Feb 95, applicant was discharged under the provisions  of  AFI
36-3203, with service characterized as under  honorable  conditions
(general).  She was credited with 5 years, 6 months, and 10 days of
active service.

Applicant appeared and testified before  the  Air  Force  Discharge
Review Board (AFDRB)  on  22  Mar  01.   They  concluded  that  the
discharge  was  consistent  with  the  procedural  and  substantive
requirements  of  the  discharge  regulation  and  was  within  the
discretion of the discharge authority and that  the  applicant  was
provided full administrative due process (See AFDRB Hearing  Record
at Exhibit B).

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS reviewed this  application  and  recommended  denial.
They found that the discharge was consistent  with  the  procedural
and  substantive  requirements   of   the   discharge   regulation.
Additionally, that the discharge was within the sound discretion of
the discharge authority.  They also noted that  the  applicant  did
not submit any new evidence or identify any  errors  or  injustices
that occurred  in  the  discharge  processing.   Accordingly,  they
recommended her records remain the same and her request be  denied.


A complete copy of the 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 10 May 02 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 error or injustice.  After a  thorough
review of the evidence of record and  applicant's  submission,  the
discharge appears to be in compliance with the governing AFI and we
find no evidence to indicate that her separation from the Air Force
was inappropriate.  We find no evidence of error in this  case  and
after  thoroughly  reviewing  the  documentation  that   has   been
submitted in support of 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 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
AFBCMR Docket Number 02-01248 in Executive Session on 11 July 2002,
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Lawrence R. Leehy, Panel Chair
      Ms. Diane Arnold, Member
      Mr. E. David Hoard, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 1 Apr 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 26 Apr 02.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 May 02, w/atchs.




                                   LAWRENCE R. LEEHY
                                   Panel Chair