RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02923
		INDEX CODE:  110.02
	 	COUNSEL:  NONE

	 	HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed.

_________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She thought that she made the right decision when she was discharged but now regrets that decision.

In support of the appeal, the applicant submits a personal statement. 

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 19 June 1992.  On 14 September 1993, she was notified by her commander that she was being recommended for discharge due to failure in alcohol abuse rehabilitation.  The reason for this action was that on 7 November 1992, she was disrespectful and provoking in speech toward a noncommissioned officer and received a letter of reprimand (LOR).  On 22 May 1993, investigation disclosed that she assaulted and harassed another Air Force member by striking, scratching and using provoking speech.  For this conduct she received a LOR.  On 25 May 1993, due to being involved in several incidents in which alcohol was a factor, she was referred to social actions for an alcohol evaluation.  During that evaluation, it was determined that she had an alcohol problem; however, she denied that fact and refused to participate in a treatment program.   In a legal review of the case file, the base legal office found the case legally sufficient to support discharge.   The discharge authority approved the separation and ordered an honorable discharge without probation and rehabilitation.  On 7 October 1993, she was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-10 (alcohol rehabilitation failure) with an honorable discharge.  She received a RE code of 2H, Participating in Track 4 or 5 of the Substance Abuse Reorientation and Treatment (SART) program for alcohol, or has failed to complete Track 4.  She served 1 year 3 months and 19 days on active duty.

Applicant does not contest the accuracy of the RE code and after reviewing the applicable instruction, AFI 36-2606, it appears the RE code issued is accurate.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  The applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge process.  Additionally, she provided no facts warranting a change in her discharge.  

The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant states that getting out of the Air Force was one of the biggest mistakes she has made.  There were many reasons why she failed to attend alcohol abuse rehabilitation and she felt it was the right decision at the time.

A copy of the applicant’s complete response 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 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.  Applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, we are not persuaded that the applicant has been the victim of an error or injustice.  At the time members are separated from the Air Force, they are furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality of their service and circumstances of their separation.  After a thorough review of the evidence of record, we believe that given the circumstances surrounding the applicant’s separation, the RE code issued was in accordance with the appropriate directives.  Therefore, we find no basis upon which to recommend favorable action on 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 BC-2003-02923 in Executive Session on 10 December 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 5 Aug 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRSP, dated 3 Oct 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 31 Oct 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 1 Dec 03.