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:

                 Mr. Henry Romo Jr., Panel Chair
                 Mr. Patrick R. Wheeler, Member
                 Mr. Roscoe Hinton Jr., 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.




                                   PATRICK R. WHEELER
                                   Acting Panel Chair