RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00226

					COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO 



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded 
to honorable and her Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code changed 
to allow her to reapply to join the Air Force as an officer.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She was administratively discharged without being referred to a 
mental health provider for the issues she was going through with 
her family.  She was told she could reenlist at a later date. 
Now that she has matured and earned a college degree, she would 
like to continue serving in the Air Force.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 6 Sep 2000, the applicant initially entered the Regular Air 
Force. 
 
On 12 Nov 02, the applicant’s commander notified her that he was 
recommending her discharge under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, 
Administrative Separation of Airmen, for misconduct--minor 
disciplinary infractions.  The reasons for the action were: the 
applicant failed to refrain from using a government telephone 
for personal long distance calls and failed to refrain from 
allowing another individual to use her military identification 
card to obtain services from a government dining facility.  For 
both actions, the applicant received nonjudicial punishment.  
Further, she failed to obey a lawful order by leaving work early 
and made a false official statement about the incident.  She 
also failed to report to duty at her designated location and 
time.  For these actions, she received two letters of reprimand 
and a record of individual counseling.


On 15 Nov 02, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the 
discharge notification.  She consulted with counsel and 
submitted statements to her commander for consideration.
 
On 13 Nov 02, the discharge action was found legally sufficient.
 
On 25 Nov 02, the applicant was furnished a general (under 
honorable conditions) discharge for misconduct and was credited 
with 2 years, 2 months, and 20 days of active service.

On 12 Jul 07, the applicant appealed to the Air Force Discharge 
Review Board (AFDRB) to have her discharge upgraded; however, 
the AFDRB denied her appeal.  The board found that “neither the 
evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant 
substantiates an inequity or impropriety that would justify a 
change of discharge.” 

In response to a request for post-service information, the 
applicant provided a copy of an FBI arrest record (Exhibit G).

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the memoranda prepared by the Air Force offices of 
primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibits C 
and D.


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of 
an error or injustice.  The applicant was provided the 
opportunity to correct her conduct and behavior without success.  
Her commander determined the negative aspects of her performance 
outweighed the positive aspects of her service.  Based on the 
documentation provided, the discharge, to include the Separation 
Program Designator (SPD) code, narrative reason for separation 
and character of service, was appropriately administered.  The 
applicant did not provide any evidence that an error or 
injustice occurred in the processing of her discharge.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial with respect to the applicant’s RE 
code, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice.  
The applicant’s RE code of 2B was required due to the fact that 
her service was characterized as general (under honorable 
conditions).  Even if the applicant's discharge is ever upgraded 
from general to honorable, 2C would be the required RE code, 
which is not an immediately eligible to enlist RE code, but 
would require a waiver to enter the military service.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the 
applicant on 28 Jul 14 for review and comment within 30 days 
Exhibit E).  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 an error or injustice.  We took 
notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the 
merits of the case; however, we find no evidence of an error or 
injustice that occurred in the discharge processing.  Based on 
the available evidence of record, it appears the discharge, to 
include the reenlistment eligibility (RE) code, was consistent 
with the substantive requirements of the discharge instruction 
and within the commander's discretionary authority.  The 
applicant has provided no evidence which would lead us to 
believe the characterization of the service was contrary to the 
provisions of the governing regulation, unduly harsh, or 
disproportionate to the offenses committed.  In the interest of 
justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on 
clemency; however, we find the evidence presented insufficient 
to recommend relief on that basis.  Therefore, in the absence of 
evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting 
the relief sought.

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 the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the 
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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 AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2014-00226 in Executive Session on 21 Nov 14 under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      , Panel Chair
      , Member
      , Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 13 Dec 13.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 14 Feb 14.
Exhibit D.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 20 Feb 14.
Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Jul 14, w/atchs.
Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, undated.
Exhibit G.  FBI arrest record, dated 18 Ju1 14