RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-03518

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She joined the Air Force just five weeks into her 17th birthday.   She
had never been away from her family or North Carolina up to that time.
 As the Board can imagine, this  led  to  her  being  very  sheltered.
After boot camp, she was assigned to Kessler AFB, MS for  training  in
the Administrative functions (70230C).   While  at  Kessler,  she  was
exposed to alcohol for the first time in  her  life  and  she  quickly
became a problem drinker.  Her commander at Kessler arranged  for  her
to go to Randolph AFB TX in the spring  of  1980  for  rehabilitation.
She first reported to her duty station, Beal AFB CA, then was  quickly
was shipped out to Randolph for a month.  Upon returning to Beal,  she
was again in an environment that was pervasive  with  alcohol.   Since
she was 17, she wasn’t permitted to drink off the base,  but  on  base
she  could  drink  all  she  wanted.   She  feel  strongly  that   the
environment fostered a climate of heavy drinking.  As a result of  her
fall into what she would now describe as acute  alcoholism,  she  made
many poor choices in her military career.  Each of the  items  in  her
personnel file that were negative can be directly traced to alcoholism
and the effect on her ability to make sound decisions.   She  believes
that if the  environment  had  not  fostered  such  lax  rules  around
underage drinking, she would have taken another route  more  favorable
to her military career.

In support of her application, she submits a personal statement.

Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________





STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force as an airman basic  on
19 Nov 79.  She was discharged from the Air  Force  on     17  Mar  82
under the provisions of  AFR  39-12  (Unsuitable  -  Apathy  Defective
Attitude) with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge.   She
served 2 years, 3 months and 29 days of total active duty service.

On 22 Feb 82, the applicant’s  commander  notified  her  that  he  was
recommending her for a general discharge for  continuously  displaying
an apathetic  and  defective  attitude  toward  her  responsibilities.
Applicant was punished under Article 15,     19 Feb 82, for failure to
report for duty; two Letters of Reprimand, dated 24 Aug 81 for failure
to report to duty, and   13 Apr 83 for forgery with intent to defraud;
and three Letters of Counseling, dated  19  Jul  81  for  insufficient
funds, 17 Jun 81 for substandard duty performance, and 29 May  81  for
failure to follow proper leave procedures.  Two out  of  three  airman
performance reports (APRs) stated her job performance  was  less  than
satisfactory.  She was personally  evaluated  and  interviewed  by  an
appointed evaluation  officer  who  recommended  a  discharge  without
probation and rehabilitation (P&R) because  applicant  demonstrated  a
poor attitude, lack of motivation to improve, and a strong  desire  to
be separated from the Air Force.  The base legal office  reviewed  the
case and found it legally sufficient to support  the  discharge.   The
Discharge Authority approved  her  discharge  and  ordered  a  general
discharge without P&R.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial and states based upon the  documentation
in the file the discharge  was  consistent  with  the  procedural  and
substantive requirements of the discharge  regulation.   Additionally,
the discharge was within the discretion of  the  discharge  authority.
The applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify  any  errors
or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.  She provided
no facts warranting an upgrade of the discharge.

AFPC/DPPRS complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the Air  Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant on 20 Dec 02, for review and comment.  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 that failure to timely file.

3.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of error or injustice that would warrant an  upgrade  of
her  discharge  to  honorable.   We  agree  with   the   opinion   and
recommendation of the Air Force office of primary  responsibility  and
adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that she has not
been the victim of an error  or  injustice.   Evidence  has  not  been
provided which would lead us to  believe  that  the  action  taken  to
affect her discharge from the Air Force was improper  or  contrary  to
the provisions of the governing regulations at the time; or, that  the
characterization of her service was based on factors  other  than  her
own misconduct.  Therefore, based on the available evidence of record,
we find no compelling basis  upon  which  to  recommend  granting  the
relief sought in this application.

4.    The applicant's case is adequately documented  and  it  has  not
been shown that a personal appearance with  or  without  counsel  will
materially  add  to  our  understanding  of  the  issue(s)   involved.
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of a 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 Docket  Number  02-03518
in Executive Session on 12 February 2003, under the provisions of  AFI
36-2603:

                  Mr. Albert F. Lowas, Jr., Panel Chair
                  Mr. William H. Anderson, Member
                  Mr. James W. Russell III, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 29 Oct 02, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, 4 Dec 02.
      Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 Dec 02.





      ALBERT F. LOWAS, JR.
      Panel Chair