RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-02642
            INDEX NUMBER:  110.00
      XXXXXXXXXXXXXX   COUNSEL:  None

      XXX-XX-XXXX      HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be given constructive  credit  for  eight  months  of  service  and
allowed to retire from the Air Force.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The  “2H”  Reenlistment  Eligibility   (RE)   code   he   was   given,
“Participating in the alcohol  rehabilitation  program  in  accordance
with AFR 30-2, or has failed to complete  the  alcohol  rehabilitation
program” was unjust and prevented him  serving  the  eight  months  he
needed to retire.

In support of his appeal, the applicant has submitted a copy of his DD
Form 214 and an  extract  from  AFI  36-2606  defining  his  RE  code.
Examiner’s note:  AFI 36-2606 was not in effect at  the  time  of  the
applicant’s separation from service.  It later superceded AFR 35-16.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant served on active duty in the Air Force from 1 Feb 71  to
14 Jun 90, a total of 19 years, 4 months, and 14 days.  On 21 Feb  89,
while the applicant was serving in the grade of staff sergeant (SSgt),
he was notified by his commander of his intent  to  punish  him  under
Article 15 for failure to pay a just debt in violation of Article  134
of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).  On  24  Feb  89,  the
applicant accepted proceedings under Article 15 and requested to  make
a personal appearance and submit a written presentation.   On  27  Feb
89, the commander determined that  the  applicant  had  committed  the
alleged offense and  imposed  punishment  consisting  of  a  six-month
suspended reduction to sergeant.  The applicant  did  not  appeal  the
punishment.  On     20 Apr 89, the applicant’s commander notified  him
that he was considering vacating the suspended punishment due  to  the
applicant’s failure to pay a  debt.   The  applicant  again  consulted
counsel and requested a personal appearance,  but  did  not  submit  a
written presentation.  On 3 May 89, the commander determined that  the
applicant committed the alleged offense and reduced the  applicant  to
the grade of sergeant effective 27 Feb 89.   On      16  Aug  89,  the
applicant was again offered Article 15  proceedings  for  dishonorably
failing to pay a just debt.  On 13  Sep  89,  the  applicant  accepted
proceedings under Article 15 and elected to make a personal appearance
before his  commander.   On  15  Sep  89,  the  applicant’s  commander
determined  that  he  committed  the  alleged   offense.    Punishment
consisted of a reduction to  Airman  First  Class  and  forfeiture  of
$150.00 per month for two months.  Both punishments were suspended for
six months.   The  applicant  did  not  appeal.   On  3  Nov  89,  the
applicant’s commander notified him that he was considering whether  to
vacate the suspended punishment due to the applicant’s alleged failure
to pay a  just  debt.   The  applicant  elected  to  make  a  personal
appearance  before  his  commander.   On  27  Nov  89,  the  commander
determined that the applicant  committed  the  alleged  offense.   The
earlier punishment was vacated and the applicant was  reduced  to  the
grade of airman  first  class  effective  15  Sep  89.   According  to
documentation  in  the  applicant’s  master  personnel   records,   he
voluntarily signed AF Form 964,  “PCS,  TDY  or  Training  Declination
Statement,” on   26 Apr 89, declining to extend on active duty  for  a
permanent change of station move.  The applicant was discharged in the
grade of airman first class on 14 Jun 90.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRRP recommends denial of the applicant’s appeal.   By  signing
the AF Form 964, the applicant declined to extend on active  duty  and
was also made ineligible to reenlist or enlist in the Air Force for at
least 93 days  after  his  separation.   Consequently,  the  applicant
failed to serve the 20 years required for him to  voluntarily  retire.
Additionally, the authority to  use  the  Temporary  Early  Retirement
Authority was not given to the Air Force until 12 Mar  93,  after  the
applicant’s separation.

The complete evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the  applicant  on
31 Oct 03 for review and comment within 30 days.  To date, a  response
has not been received.

_________________________________________________________________

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the BCMR Medical Consultant evaluated
the  applicant’s  case.   He  recommends  denial  of  the  applicant’s
request.  The record shows that the applicant voluntarily elected  not
to reenlist.   Approximately  one  year  before  his  separation,  the
applicant   voluntarily   self   identified   and   entered    alcohol
rehabilitation.  There is no  evidence  that  the  applicant  was  not
afforded full opportunity for alcohol rehabilitation.  The  full  year
between his initial entry into rehabilitation and his  separation  was
ample time to successfully complete the program.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the additional Air Force evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant on 24 Dec 03 for review and  comment  within  30  days.   To
date, a response has not been received.

_________________________________________________________________

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.   We  took  notice  of   the
applicant's complete submission in judging the  merits  of  the  case;
however, the majority of  the  Board  agrees  with  the  opinions  and
recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and
adopts their rationale as the basis  for  their  conclusion  that  the
applicant  has  not  been  the  victim  of  an  error  or   injustice.
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the majority of
the Board finds no compelling basis to recommend granting  the  relief
sought in this application.

_________________________________________________________________

RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD:

A majority of the  Board  finds  insufficient  evidence  of  error  or
injustice and recommends the application be denied.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered Docket  Number  BC-2003-
02642 in Executive Session on 19 February 2004, under  the  provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Vaughn E. Schlunz, Panel Chair
      Ms. Jean A. Reynolds, Member
      Mr. James W. Russell, III, Member

By a majority vote, the Board voted to deny applicant’s request.   Ms.
Reynolds voted to grant the applicant’s request but did not desire  to
submit a minority report.   The  following  documentary  evidence  was
considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 31 Jul 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPPRRP, dated 4 Sep 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 31 Oct 03.
    Exhibit E.  Memorandum, BCMR Medical Consultant,
                dated 19 Dec 03.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 24 Dec 03.




                                   VAUGHN E. SCHLUNZ
                                   Panel Chair

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD
                                  FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
(AFBCMR)

SUBJECT:  AFBCMR Application of XXXXXXXXXX, XXX-XX-XXXX

      I have carefully reviewed the evidence of record and the
recommendation of the Board members.  A majority found that applicant
had not provided sufficient evidence of error or injustice and
recommended the case be denied.  I concur with that finding and their
conclusion that relief is not warranted.  Accordingly, I accept their
recommendation that the application be denied.

      Please advise the applicant accordingly.




                                        JOE G. LINEBERGER
                                        Director
                                        Air Force Review Boards Agency