RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01887

					COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO 


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to reflect:

	1.  His demotion to airman first class (E-3) be removed 
from his record, his grade of senior airman (E-4) be restored.

	2.  His name be removed from the Quality Force Review Board 
(QFRB) list and he be retained on active duty and he be 
reassigned to another base.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was arrested for driving while under the influence (DUI) and 
his commander administered punishment before the civil court 
findings were rendered.  The civil court dismissed his DUI.  
Since his DUI was dismissed by the civil court, he believes the 
punishment rendered by his commander should be removed.

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 22 Jul 08, the applicant commenced his enlistment in the 
Regular Air Force.

On 9 Jun 13, the applicant was apprehended by civilian police 
for operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of 
alcohol.  His blood alcohol level at the time of arrest was 0.18 
percent.

On 2 Aug 13, the applicant’s commander initiated a demotion 
action.  The applicant was demoted to the grade of airman first 
class with a DOR of 15 Aug 13.

The applicant received a referral enlisted performance report 
(EPR) for the period 22 Mar 13 thru 21 Mar 14.  He received a 
“Does Not Meet” in Section II, Block 2 due to comments relating 
to him receiving an LOR and a demotion.

The applicant’s commander initiated an AF Form 3538E, Enlisted 
Retention Recommendation, and did not recommend he be retained 
on active duty.  The commander noted the applicant had numerous 
disciplinary issues and was demoted for failing to me his 
responsibilities as an airman.

The applicant’s civil DUI case was dismissed upon him attending 
six Alcohol Anonymous meetings, completion of an online 
defensive driving course, completion of ten hours of community 
service, and payment of the fine and court costs.

On 5 May 14, QFRB convened and determined the applicant should 
not be retained on active duty.

On 29 Sep 14, the applicant was furnished an honorable 
discharge, and was credited with six years, two months, and 
eight days of active service.   


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of 
an error or an injustice.  The applicant requests his demotion 
to airman first class be removed and his grade be reinstated to 
senior airman.  The applicant was demoted because he failed to 
fulfill his responsibilities by DUI with a blood alcohol level 
of 0.18 percent and not because he was found guilty or convicted 
by trial.

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

AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of 
an error or an injustice.  The applicant is requesting removal 
from the QFRB list to be allowed to remain on active duty.  
However, the applicant’s commander had the obligation and 
authority to administer further administrative actions against 
the applicant.  The QFRB reviewed the applicant’s entire record 
and determined he could not be retained.  

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

AFPC/JA recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an 
error or an injustice and concurs with the findings of 
AFPC/DPSOE.  The applicant’s demotion action was initiated due 
to his DUI with a blood alcohol level of 0.18.  The applicant 
has not contested he was DUI, the results of his blood alcohol 
test, or that his DUI is a legal basis for demotion.  However, 
he believes that the dismissal of the DUI by the civil court 
should have prevented his commander from initiating the demotion 
and subsequent non-retention recommendation.  It appears the 
conditions for the applicant’s dismissal are consistent with a 
plea bargain in the civilian court system and is common for 
first time offenders.  However, this should not be confused with 
an outright dismissal of a charge; the charges were not 
dismissed due to him being found not guilty or innocent, but 
only to facilitate a deferred adjudication.

Under the provision AFR 36-2502, Airman Promotion/Demotion 
Programs, a conviction is not required in order for the 
commander to determine whether an airman has failed his 
responsibilities.  The result of the applicant’s blood alcohol 
test was sufficient evidence that he failed his responsibilities 
as an airman.  The actions of the civil court do not affect the 
validity of the actions taken by the Air Force.

A complete copy of the AFPC/JA evaluation is at Exhibit E.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the 
applicant on 27 Oct 14 for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit F).  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 timely filed.

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 agree with the opinions and 
recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary 
responsibility (OPR) and adopt their rationale as the basis for 
our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error 
or injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the 
contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested 
relief.


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-2014-01887 in Executive Session on 24 Feb 15 under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 20 May 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 11 Jun 14.
	Exhibit D.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 28 Aug 14.
	Exhibit E.  Memorandum, AFPC/JA, dated 24 Sep 14.
Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Oct 14.