RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-02882
            INDEX CODE:  110.02
      XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX  COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her active duty performed 15 April 2002 through 11 July 2002, in support  of
OPERATION NOBLE EAGLE, be added to her National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form  22,
Report of Separation/Discharge and  Record  of  Service;  her  discharge  be
upgraded to honorable; her reenlistment code be changed to “eligible; her E-
5 status be restored;  and  she  be  transferred  to  the  Individual  Ready
Reserve (IRR).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her characterization of discharge is an injustice because it does  not  take
into account her prior honorable service and solely focuses  on  one  single
event.  She accepted her mistake of not paying her  government  credit  card
in a  timely  fashion,  but  believes  she  should  have  been  afforded  an
honorable discharge.

In support of her request, the applicant submits copies of her DD Form  214,
Certificate of Release or Discharge from  Active  Duty,  Special  Orders  of
active duty in support of OPERATION NOBLE EAGLE, and a letter of support.

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

According to the DD Form 214 provided by the applicant, she  entered  active
duty with the United States Coast Guard on 26 July 1994  and  was  honorably
released from active duty effective 11 March 1998 for  reason  of  hardship.
According to the military personnel data system, the applicant  enlisted  in
the Air National Guard on 15 June 2000 and was  promoted  to  the  grade  of
senior airman effective and with a date of rank of 1 February 2003.

Special Order AW-322, dated 5 February 2003,  indicates  the  applicant  was
released from the  Air  National  Guard  with  a  General  (under  honorable
conditions) discharge effective 1 February 2003.  Her NGB Form 22,  National
Guard Bureau Report of Separation  and  Record  of  Service,  indicates  the
reason for the applicant’s discharge  was  for  failure  to  meet  financial
obligations and indicated she  was  ineligible  for  reenlistment.   Special
Order AW-369, dated 24 February 2003, revoked Special Order  AW-322  due  to
the applicant’s non-judicial  punishment  proceedings.   No  other  military
records are available.

The remaining relevant facts are provided in the  Air  Force  evaluation  at
Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

NGB/A1PS recommends denial of the applicant’s  requests.   A1PS  states  the
applicant served three years of active duty in  the  Coast  Guard  prior  to
entering the Air  National  Guard.   Upon  transferring  and  completion  of
technical school, she was placed on active duty from 15 April  2002  through
11 July 2002 in support of OPERATION NOBLE EAGLE.  In August, she found  out
she was  pregnant  and  was  having  complications.   After  discussing  her
condition with her Chief, she transferred to  the  IRR.   She  out-processed
the base and planned on returning after her child’s birth in the  summer  of
2003.  She subsequently signed her discharge package due  to  her  pregnancy
complications.

A1PS  states  that  according  to  the  Subject  Matter  Expert  (SME),  the
applicant should  have  received  a  DD  Form  214  for  her  service  under
OPERATION NOBLE EAGLE; therefore a  DD  Form  214  will  be  issued  to  the
member.  However, periods of active duty are not recorded on  the  NGB  Form
22.   Regarding  the  matter  of  her  request  to  upgrade  her   discharge
characterization, the SME finds no evidence  to  support  an  upgrade.   The
reason for the applicant’s discharge characterization  was  her  refusal  to
pay her Government Travel Card (GTC) charges of $1,598.15.  The  comptroller
and  GTC  Agency  Program  Coordinator  reconfirmed  with  Bank  of  America
officials on 26 September 2007 that the debt has never been paid and had  to
be charged off as a loss.  The applicant has not submitted any  evidence  to
support an injustice  occurred  regarding  her  discharge  characterization;
however, it is A1PS’s opinion that an error possibly occurred when the  unit
failed to issue a DD  Form  214  to  document  the  applicant’s  service  in
support of OPERATION NOBLE EAGLE.

The A1PF evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded  to  the  applicant  on  12
October 2007 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this  date,  this
office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

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.   We  note  the  office   of   primary
responsibility indicates the oversight of recording the applicant’s  active
duty performed from 15 April 2002 through  11  July  2002,  in  support  of
OPERATION NOBLE EAGLE, will be administratively corrected by issuing  a  DD
Form 214 to the applicant.  Therefore, the  Board  will  only  address  the
applicant’s remaining concerns.  The applicant did not  provide  persuasive
evidence showing the information in the discharge case was  erroneous,  her
substantial rights were violated,  or  that  her  commanders  abused  their
discretionary authority.  The character of discharge which  was  issued  at
the time of the applicant’s separation appears to  accurately  reflect  the
circumstances of her separation and we do not find it to  be  in  error  or
unjust.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find  no
basis upon which to recommend favorable action on 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 in  Executive
Session on 21 December 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Audrey Y. Davis, Member
                 Ms. Patricia R. Collins, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with  AFBCMR
Docket Number BC-2007-02882:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 4 Sep 07, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, NGB/A1PS, dated 5 Oct 07, w/atch.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 12 Oct 07.




                                   CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
                                   Panel Chair