RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

      IN THE MATTER OF:            DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-02097
            INDEX CODE: 110.00
      XXXXXXX                     COUNSEL:  NONE

                                   HEARING DESIRED:  YES

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 15 JANUARY 2008

______________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

2.  Her  narrative  reason  for  separation  (misconduct)  along  with  her
separation and reentry code (RE) be changed.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She believes the situation at the time did  not  justify  her  receiving  a
general discharge.

Her complete submission is at Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 12 July 2000.  On 2 February
2005, she was notified by her commander that he  was  recommending  she  be
discharged from  the  Air  Force  under  the  provisions  of  AFI  36-3208,
Administrative Separation of Airmen, paragraph 5.49 for  misconduct  (Minor
Disciplinary Infractions).  The specific reasons for this action were on 10
May 2004, she received a Letter of Counseling for leaving work three  times
in a three week period to pick up her child from  the  daycare  center;  on
20 July 2004, she received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR)  for  canceling  her
lab test without consulting the attending physician; on 9 August 2004,  she
received  an  LOR  for  switching  shifts  with  another  airman  and   not
coordinating the change with the officer in charge and not showing  up  for
the shift as she agreed too; on 26 August 2004, she received an LOR for not
updating medical results in the computer and for  making  an  inappropriate
response to a coworker;  on  1 December  2004,  she  received  an  LOR  for
returning to work late after an appointment and for  arriving  to  work  30
minutes late. She was advised of her rights and she acknowledged receipt on
2 February 2005.  The applicant consulted counsel and submitted a statement
on her own behalf.  In a legal review of her case  the  base  legal  office
found it legally sufficient and recommended a general discharge.  Applicant
was discharged in the grade of airman first class on  17  March  2005  with
service characterized as general (under  honorable  conditions).   She  was
assigned RE code “2B” which denotes “discharged under General or other-than-
honorable conditions”.  She served a total of 4 years, 8 months and 5  days
on active duty.
________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  DPPRS states the  discharge  was  consistent
with  the  procedural  and  substantive  requirements  of   the   discharge
regulation.  In addition, the discharge was within the sound discretion  of
the discharge authority.  She did not submit any new evidence  or  identify
any errors or injustices that occurred in her discharge processing.

The complete DPPRS 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  13
October 2006 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date,  this
office has received no response (Exhibit D).

________________________________________________________________

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 an error or injustice.   After  careful  consideration  of  the
available evidence, we found no indication that the actions taken to  affect
her discharge and characterization of her service  were  improper,  contrary
to the provisions of the governing regulations in effect  at  the  time,  or
based on factors other than her own misconduct.  Therefore,  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  that
the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.

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 issues  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 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  BC-2006-02097  in  Executive
Session on 5 December 2006, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. Michael V. Barbino, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Renee M. Collier, Member
                 Ms. Glenda H. Scheiner, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 28 June 2006, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  AFPC/DPPRS Letter, dated 3 October 2006.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 October 2006.




            MICHAEL V. BARBINO
            Panel Chair





                         DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
                                WASHINGTON DC



[pic]

Office Of The Assistant Secretary

AFBCMR
1535 Command Dr, EE Wing, 3rd Flr
Andrews AFB MD 20762-7002

XXXXXXX
XXXXXXX
XXXXXXX

Dear XXXXXXX

      Reference your application, AFBCMR BC-2006-02097 submitted under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603 (Section 1552, 10 USC).

      After careful consideration of your application and military records,
the Board determined that the evidence you presented did not demonstrate
the existence of material error or injustice.  Accordingly, the Board
denied your application.

      You have the right to submit newly discovered relevant evidence for
consideration by the Board.  In the absence of such additional evidence, a
further review of your application is not possible.

      BY DIRECTION OF THE PANEL CHAIR





                                                       GREGORY E.
JOHNSON
                                                             Chief
Examiner
                                                 Air Force Board
for Correction
                                                       of Military
Records

2 Attachments:
Record of Board Proceedings
Information Bulletin