RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-00438
            INDEX CODE:  110.02

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: YES

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His  Reenlistment  Eligibility  (RE)  code  of  2C   (Involuntarily
separated with an honorable discharge; or  entry  level  separation
without characterization of service) be changed and  his  narrative
reason for separation be removed.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The narrative  reason  for  separation  contradicts  his  honorable
characterization of service and has greatly hindered his ability to
obtain civil service employment.

In support of his appeal, applicant submitted a letter of character
reference from a former chaplain and a  copy  of  a  letter,  dated
27 Nov 02, from the Air Force Discharge Review Board.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 15  Sep  88  in  the
grade of airman basic.  He served on continuous active  duty  until
his involuntary discharge on 13 Nov 97.  His highest grade held was
staff sergeant.

A resume of  applicant’s  last  six  enlisted  performance  reports
(EPRs) follows:

            PERIOD CLOSING              OVERALL EVALUATION

                 13 Oct 92                                    5
                 13 Oct 93                                    5
                 11 Jun 94                                    5
                 11 Jun 95                                    5
                 11 Jun 96                                    5
                 11 Jun 97                                    5

On or about 28  Aug  97,  he  received  an  Article  15  for  three
instances  of  failure  to  go  to  his  appointed  place  of  duty
(5, 15 and 18 Aug 97) and for disobeying  a  lawful  order  by  not
moving into the dormitory by the time required.  He was reduced  to
the grade of senior airman.

The  specific  facts  surrounding  the  applicant’s  discharge  are
unknown as the discharge  correspondence  is  not  available.   The
following information was obtained from  the  Air  Force  Discharge
Review Board (AFDRB) Hearing Record.

In Jan 96, applicant self-referred to  the  local  substance  abuse
rehabilitation program after excessive drinking every day  for  six
months.  He was diagnosed as mildly alcohol dependent  and  put  in
Track 4.  In  Oct  96,  while  TDY,  he  fell  from  a  three-story
building, causing serious  injury  to  himself.   A  Line  of  Duty
Determination (LOD) was found not to be in the line of duty  and  a
question of alcohol involvement was suspected but not resolved.  In
Jan 97, he was again entered into Track  4  rehabilitation  due  to
excessive alcohol abuse.  In Jun 97, he was  admitted  to  the  in-
patient Substance Abuse Rehabilitation Center at Eglin AFB FL after
a four-day drinking binge.  After completing the program in Aug 97,
he had a relapse and was found by his unit when he didn’t  show  up
for work.  He was not readmitted to the program but released to his
unit and put on suicide watch.  He received a letter  of  reprimand
(LOR) for being found incapacitated on a number  of  occasions  and
unable to report to work.

In Oct 97, he self-admitted himself for further in-patient care due
to alcohol binging.  He was then entered into  Track  5  for  detox
pending discharge based on alcohol rehabilitation failure.  He also
received another LOR for failure to go due to intoxication and  for
a motor vehicle accident in which he struck another airman’s car on
base and leaving the scene of the accident.

On 13 Nov 97, he was honorably discharged under the  provisions  of
AFI 36-3208 by reason of “alcohol rehabilitation failure”  and  was
issued reenlistment eligibility (RE) code 2C.  He was credited with
9 years, 1 month, and 29 days of active duty.

On 17  Nov  00,  the  Air  Force  Discharge  Review  Board  (AFDRB)
considered and denied the applicant’s request for a change  to  the
reason and authority for the discharge.  They  concluded  that  the
discharge  was  consistent  with  the  procedural  and  substantive
requirements  of  the  discharge  regulation  and  was  within  the
discretion of the discharge authority and that  the  applicant  was
provided full administrative due process (see AFDRB Hearing  Record
at Exhibit B).

___________________________________________________________________




AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial.  They found  that  the  discharge
was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements  of
the discharge regulation.  Additionally,  that  the  discharge  was
within the sound discretion of the discharge authority.  They  also
noted that the  applicant  did  not  submit  any  new  evidence  or
identify any errors or injustices that occurred  in  the  discharge
processing, nor did he provide any facts warranting an  upgrade  of
his discharge.  Accordingly, they recommended  his  records  remain
the same.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit C.

HQ AFPC/DPPAE reviewed this application and indicated that  the  RE
code of 2C, “Involuntarily separated with an  honorable  discharge;
or entry level separation without characterization of  service”  is
correct.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant
on 9 May 03 for review and comment within  30  days.   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 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 error  or  injustice.   After  careful
review of the available records and the  information  contained  in
the  Air  Force  Discharge  Review  Board   Hearing   Record,   the
applicant’s  discharge  appears  to  be  in  compliance  with   the
governing Air Force instruction and we find no evidence to indicate
that his separation from the Air Force was inappropriate.  We  find
no evidence of error in this case and  after  thoroughly  reviewing
the documentation  that  has  been  submitted  in  support  of  the
applicant’s appeal, we do not  believe  he  has  suffered  from  an
injustice.  Therefore, based on the available evidence  of  record,
and absent persuasive evidence applicant was denied rights to which
entitled,  appropriate   instructions   were   not   followed,   or
appropriate standards were not applied, we find no basis to disturb
the existing record.

4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and  it  has  not
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel  will
materially  add  to  our  understanding  of  the  issues  involved.
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

___________________________________________________________________

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 AFBCMR Docket  Number
BC-2003-00438 in Executive Session  on  16  July  2003,  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
      Mr. John B. Hennessey, Member
      Ms. Barbara J. White-Olson, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 30 Jan 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 18 Mar 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAE, dated 5 May 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 May 03.




                                   MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
                                   Panel Chair