RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBERS:  01-02322
		INDEX CODE 100.06
	 	COUNSEL:  None

	 	HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of “2B” (separated with a general or under-other-than-honorable conditions discharge) be changed so she can reenlist in the Air National Guard (ANG).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She attended a party that got very rowdy and she got very inebriated.  She did not know what was happening.  She was young, naïve and did not realize her actions would have such repercussions.  In the past 7 years, she has matured and considers herself to be of sound moral character and eligible for enlistment. She is currently a member of the Army National Guard. She wants to transfer to the Phoenix ANG; however, she is ineligible to reenlist with her current RE code. 

She provides a copy of an enlistment contract reflecting that she enlisted in the Arizona Army National Guard on 28 Aug 00 for a period of 1 year. 

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 9 Jun 86. She underwent Substance Abuse Orientation Training in 1987 when she was assigned to Clark AB. During the period in question, she was a sergeant assigned to the 91st Operational Support Squadron at Minot AFB, ND.  Her performance reports from 27 Jul 87 to 29 Jan 93 reflect the following overall ratings: 6, 8, 8, 9, 4 (new system), 4, 4, 4, and 3 (referral).

The AF Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI) conducted an investigation during 1-18 Feb 93 after receiving photographs of 
the applicant and 3 other airmen engaged in apparent acts of sodomy. Witnesses at the 18 Jan 93 party indicated that no sexual activity was observed and the subjects stated they danced and posed for the camera but no actual sexual activity occurred. 

On 18 Feb 93, the Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) for the period 30 Jan 92-29 Jan 93 was referred to the applicant for unacceptable on/off duty conduct and ineffective leadership/supervision. She also received an Article 15 on 16 Mar 93 with a suspended reduction to airman first class (A1C) and forfeiture of $250.00 pay per month for two months for being drunk and disorderly on or about 18 Jan 93. 

On 24 Mar 93, the suspended reduction was vacated because she exposed her buttocks and rubbed her crotch with a beer bottle while drunk and disorderly at the NCO Club on 7-8 Mar 93. She was reduced to A1C with a date of rank of 24 Mar 93.

On 8 Apr 93, the commander notified the applicant that he was recommending her for a general discharge for misconduct, citing the incidents that prompted the nonjudicial actions. 

On 9 Apr 93, the applicant submitted a conditional waiver of her right to an administrative discharge board, contingent on her receipt of no less than a general discharge. She submitted no statements in her behalf. Legal review on 13 Apr 93 recommended that she be issued a general discharge without probation and rehabilitation. On 23 Apr 93, the discharge authority approved the applicant’s conditional waiver and directed her general discharge.

The applicant was discharged with a general characterization in the grade of A1C on 28 Apr 93 for misconduct, conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline, with 6 years, 10 months and 20 days of active service.  She was issued an RE code of “2B.”

On 11 May 94, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied her request for an honorable discharge.  The AFBCMR also denied her appeal in Apr 95.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS provided their rationale for recommending denial.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

HQ AFPC/DPPAE advised that the applicant’s RE code is correct.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Complete copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 9 Nov 01 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this office has received no response. 

_________________________________________________________________

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 probable error or injustice.  After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that her RE code should be changed. Applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, we do not find these assertions, in and by themselves, sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air Force.  In this regard, her records indicate that she underwent Substance Abuse Orientation Training in 1987. Therefore, not only was she aware she had a problem and but also she was given a rehabilitative opportunity.  The applicant appears to have exercised poor judgement in that her continued drinking and misbehavior resulted in two nonjudicial actions. In view of the above, the applicant has failed to sustain her burden of having suffered either an error or an injustice and we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought. Since she apparently was able to enlist with the Army National Guard, we believe the applicant should pursue her desire for military duty through that service branch.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of probable 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 12 December 2001 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

       Panel Chair
		Member
		Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 13 Aug 01, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 5 Oct 01.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAE, dated 31 Oct 01.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Nov 01.