RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-02951
		INDEX NUMBER:  110.00
	XXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL:  None

	XXX-XX-XXXX	HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of “2B”, separated with a general or under-other-than-honorable-conditions (UOTHC) discharge, be changed to one that will allow her reentry into the Air Force.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She was a model airman while in the Air Force and would like to return to the Air Force as soon as possible.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Air Force on 22 Apr 98.  On 12 Jul 00, the applicant was notified by her squadron commander that he intended to recommend her discharge from the Air Force for disobeying a direct order to take the Anthrax Vaccination, with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge.  The applicant consulted counsel and submitted a statement on her behalf.  On  18 Jul 00, the applicant’s squadron commander recommended to the Wing Commander that the applicant be discharged from service with a general discharge without the opportunity for probation and rehabilitation.  The Wing Staff Judge Advocate reviewed the discharge action against the applicant and found it to be legally sufficient.  On 18 Jul 00, the Wing Commander directed that the applicant be discharged with a general discharge without probation and rehabilitation.  The applicant was discharged from service on 24 Jul 00.

The applicant received on enlisted performance report while in the Air Force with an overall rating of “5.”

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial of the applicant’s request.  The applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.  She provided no other facts warranting an upgrade of the discharge.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPAE reviewed the applicant’s records and found the RE code of “2B” to be correct.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 20 Dec 02 for review and comment within 30 days.  To date, a response has not been received.

_________________________________________________________________

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 error or injustice.  We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the primary basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  The Board notes that the applicant was discharged for her refusal to take the Anthrax immunization.  She does not indicate in her application that if she returned to active duty, she will comply with the legal requirements levied upon her.  In the absence of such a commitment, to allow her return to active duty would not be in her or the Air Force’s best interest.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in 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 Docket Number 02-02951 in Executive Session on 4 February 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 11 Sep 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPRRS, dated 8 October 2002.
    Exhibit D.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 9 Dec 02.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 Dec 02.