RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-03359
		INDEX NUMBER:  110.00
	XXXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL:  None

	XXX-XX-XXXX	HEARING DESIRED:  No

______________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed from “4H”, serving suspended punishment pursuant to Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), to one that would allow his reentry into the Air Force.

His rank be restored.

______________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The punishment he received under Article 15 was suspended, so his rank and RE code should be upgraded.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

______________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Air Force on 3 Mar 93.  On 13 Dec 93, while in the grade of airman, the applicant was punished under Article 15, UCMJ, by his squadron commander for providing an alcoholic beverage to a person under 21 years of age in violation of local state law.  Punishment consisted of forfeiture of $100.00 pay and 7 days extra duty.  On 21 Dec 93, he was again punished under Article 15 for drunk and disorderly conduct.  Punishment consisted of a six month suspended reduction to airman basic, forfeiture of $50.00 pay per month for two months.  The applicant, while in the grade of senior airman, was punished under Article 15 on 28 Dec 00 for driving while drunk.  Punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of airman first class, forfeiture of $667.00 pay per month for two months suspended for six months, restriction to base and restriction from all facilities that serve alcohol for 20 days, and 20 days extra duty.  The applicant was discharged from the Air Force on 30 Jan 01 after completion of required service.  He was issued an RE code of “4H.”

A resume of his enlisted performance reports (EPRs) follows:

	Closeout Date					Overall Rating

	  2 Nov 94						5
	 15 Nov 95						4
	 15 Nov 96						5
	 15 Nov 97						5
	 15 Nov 98						5
	 15 Nov 99						4

______________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPAE recommends denial of the applicant’s request.  The RE code of “4H” is correct as applicant was serving Article 15 punishment at the time of discharge.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

______________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant responded to the Air Force evaluation and indicated that he believes it would be an unjust ruling to deny his request.  He states that although he was punished under Article 15 for operating a vehicle while drunk, there was no Breathalyzer or blood sample taken.  He claims that the only reason he accepted the punishment was because he was supposed to start a new career and could not be delayed.  He states that since the punishment was suspended and he was separating, he was not given the opportunity to fulfill the punishment and move on in his military career.  He asks the Board to change his RE code and allow him to serve in the Air Force Reserves during the country’s time of need.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit E.

______________________________________________________________

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.  The Board notes that the applicant contends that he only accepted punishment under Article 15 because he was due to start a new career and could not be delayed.  Notwithstanding this argument, the applicant has not provided sufficient evidence to show that the action was not warranted or that the commander’s actions were arbitrary or capricious.  The Board also notes that only the forfeiture of pay was suspended and that the applicant was actually reduced in grade, negating his argument that his rank should be restored because his punishment was suspended.  The Board does not find any violation of Air Force policy or procedure in the applicant’s case and agrees with the Air Force office of primary responsibility that the applicant’s Reenlistment Eligibility code of “4H’ is correct.  Therefore, we find no compelling basis to grant the relief requested.

______________________________________________________________

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 02-03359 in Executive Session on 6 March 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 16 Oct 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 10 Dec 02.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 20 Dec 02.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 13 Jan 03.