RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2009-04532
            INDEX CODE:  107.00
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The following sections on  her  DD  Form  214,  Certificate  of  Release  or
Discharge from Active Duty, be changed:

      1.  Block 13:  Decorations, Medals,  Badges,  Citations  and  Campaign
Ribbons Awarded or Authorized.  Add Space Badge  for  Advanced  Training  in
Satellite Operations  awarded  2  Jul  90;  Air  Force  Good  Conduct  Medal
(AFGCM).

      2.  Block 14:  Military Education.  Add  Basic  Military  Training,  6
weeks, Dec 87; Student Leader Orientation Training, Jan 88;  Student  Leader
Training Class 88-1, Mar 88;  Basic  Typing  for  Cryptologic  Trainees,  45
hours, Jan 88; Basic Non-Morse Operator Course, 880 hours, Jul  88;  Garlick
Operator  Course,  80  hours,  Aug  88;  Associate  in  Applied  Science  in
Intelligence Collection, Community College  of  the  Air  Force  (CCAF),  65
credit hours, Oct 91.  Examiner’s Note for Item 2: Basic  Military  Training
is already on the applicant’s DD Form 214 and the remaining items have  been
verified for approval and administrative correction.

      3.  Block  21:  Signature  of  Member  Being  Separated.  Change  from
“Member Not Available to Sign” to bearing her personal signature.

      4.  Block 24:  Character  of  Service.  Upgrade  from  General  (Under
Honorable Conditions) to Honorable.

      5.  Block  25:    Separation  Authority.   Upgrade  from  “AFR  39-10,
Separation  Upon  Expiration  of  Term  of  Service,  for   Convenience   of
Government,  Minority,  Dependency  and  Hardship”  to  a  more  appropriate
regulation or authority.

      6.  Block  26:  Separation  Code.  Change  from  “JKN”  (Misconduct  –
Minor Disciplinary Infractions), to a more appropriate code.

      7.  Block 27:  Reentry Code.  Upgrade from  “2B”  (Discharged  General
Under Honorable Conditions) to a more  appropriate  code  that  would  allow
reenlistment.

       8.  Block  28:  Narrative  Reason  for  Separation.    Upgrade   from
“Misconduct  –  Pattern  of  Minor  Disciplinary  Infractions”  to  a   more
appropriate explanation for discharge.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her  discharge  was  unjust.   During  this  time,  she  was  under  extreme
emotional distress caused by a physically abusive  marriage.   She  did  not
have the foresight to see the negative impact her discharge  would  have  on
her life.  She signed the DD Form 214 without understanding the  process  of
the involuntary discharge because it was not explained to her.  She was  not
given advice and was not extended her right to consult  with  counsel.   She
never signed a waiver declining counsel.

Based on her achievements and  overall  quality  of  service,  an  honorable
discharge could have been  granted.   Her  ability  to  perform  her  duties
effectively was not taken into  consideration  nor  was  her  potential  for
advancement and leadership accounted for.

Her rights were violated through improper protocol  and  failure  to  follow
procedure for involuntary discharge.  Her discharge was based on  misconduct
and a pattern of  minor  disciplinary  infractions;  however,  the  specific
pattern of misconduct was never cited.   She  was  not  provided  supporting
documents that revealed a series of offenses serious enough to  support  the
reason for discharge.  She received  a  Letter  of  Reprimand  (LOR)  and  a
reduction in grade for fraternization.  At the time, she was  18  years  old
and new to the military; however, she learned a  valuable  lesson  from  her
poor judgment and she never repeated it  again.   A  few  years  later,  she
received a Letter of Counseling (LOC), but she cannot recall  what  the  LOC
was for.  The two incidents were isolated events that were  remote  in  time
which  should  not  have  constituted  a  pattern  of   minor   disciplinary
infractions.

She was never notified that her discharge review  had  commenced.   She  was
not extended a chance to sign her DD Form 214.  Her awards  and  educational
achievements should be duly noted.

In support of her request, the applicant submits copies of her DD Form  214,
CCAF correspondence, certificates of training, post service information  and
college transcripts.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 17 Jun 93, the Board considered and denied a  similar  request  submitted
by the applicant  to  upgrade  her  general  discharge  to  honorable.   The
relevant facts in this case are contained in the Record  of  Proceedings  at
Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial of the applicant’s request for  the  AFGCM.
DPSIDR states the applicant  was  informed  that  a  review  of  her  record
revealed an error; therefore, her  DD  Form  214  was  reaccomplished.   The
voided DD  Form  214  reflected  entitlement  to  the  AFGCM;  however,  the
administratively corrected version did not.  DPSIDR notes  that  during  her
time in military service, the applicant received an LOR, four (4)  LOCs  and
an Article 15 which included a reduction in rank.

DPSIDR  states  the  AFGCM  is  awarded  to  enlisted  service  members  for
exemplary conduct during a three year period of military  service.   Service
member awarded this medal must have had character and efficiency ratings  of
excellent or higher and no  convictions  of  court  martial  throughout  the
qualifying period.  The infractions mentioned  in  the  applicant’s  records
led to her  recommendation  and  final  approval  for  discharge.   She  is,
therefore, ineligible for entitlement to the AFGCM.

The complete DPSIDR evaluation is at Exhibit C.

HQ AFPC/DPSIMC recommends denial of the applicant’s  request  for  the  USAF
Space Badge.  DPSIMC states the Space  Badge  was  authorized  in  1982  and
renamed the Space and Missile badge in 1993.  It  was  awarded  to  enlisted
personnel  in  the  Space  Systems  career  field.   Individuals  must  have
performed in a space duty position for 12 months to receive the basic  Space
Badge.  DPSIMC notes the applicant’s unit was classified  as  a  space  unit
and she served in a space duty position for the required time;  however,  in
accordance with AFI 36-2903, (Dress and Personnel Appearance  of  Air  Force
Personnel), Table 5.4., Note 3 states that “the old Space/Missile  badge  is
authorized for former members that were authorized  the  badge  via  the  AF
Form 117, (Request for Award of Space Badge) and that it is  authorized  for
wear until an individual separates or retires.”

The complete DPSIMC evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

In a three-page response, the  applicant  reiterates  many  of  her  earlier
contentions and offers explanations for the LOCs she received.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

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 regarding  the  requested  relief  with  the
exception of that granted administratively.  In that regard,  we  note  that
the  appropriate  Air  Force   offices   of   primary   responsibility   are
administratively correcting the applicant’s records to reflect award of  the
Space and Missile Badge for duties performed while  assigned  to  her  space
unit and  all  items  requested  to  be  corrected  in  Block  14,  Military
Education, of her DD  Form  214.   Regarding  the  applicant’s  request  for
upgrade of her discharge, we note this Board has previously  considered  and
denied this request.  We do not find sufficient new  and  relevant  evidence
that would warrant a reversal of our prior decision.  Additionally, we  also
do not find sufficient evidence has been provided to  warrant  changing  the
applicant’s  reentry  code,  narrative  reason  for  separation,   and   the
separation code.  Based on our review of the complete  evidence  of  record,
to include the applicant’s current submission, we find that  her  discharge,
RE code, narrative reason and SBP code are correct.  Therefore  we  find  no
basis to recommend granting the relief sought  in  this  application  beyond
that already administratively corrected.

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  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  in  AFBCMR  BC-2009-04532  in
Executive Session on 16 Sep 10, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      , Panel Chair
      , Member
      , Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 7 Dec 09, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSIDR, dated 27 May 10.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSIMC, undated.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 Aug 10.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated 24 Aug 10.




                                   Panel Chair