RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-00682
            INDEX CODE:  110.02, 112.00

      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  NONE

      XXXXXXX    HEARING DESIRED: YES

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His  narrative  reason  for   separation   and   his   reenlistment
eligibility (RE) code of 2B (involuntarily separated with a general
or under other  than  honorable  condition  (UOTHC)  discharge)  be
changed.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He attended alcohol rehabilitation while serving in  the  military,
although he was not an alcoholic and did not need rehabilitation.

In support of his appeal, applicant submitted a copy of his DD Form
214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from  Active  Duty,  dated
20 May 96, and letters of character reference  from  the  executive
director, United Way, his employer, and a sergeant with the ANG.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on  11  Aug  94  for  a
period of four years in the grade of airman basic.   Prior  to  the
events under review, he was promoted to the grade of airman with an
effective date and date of rank of 11 Feb 95.

On  15  Feb  96,   the   squadron   section   commander   initiated
administrative discharge action against the applicant  for  failure
in alcohol abuse treatment.  The specific reasons for the  proposed
action were:

     On or about 1 Nov  95,  applicant  failed  to  obey  a  lawful
general regulation by wrongfully consuming alcohol while under  the
legal drinking age of 21.   For  this  misconduct,  he  received  a
letter of reprimand.

     On or about 8 Feb 96, he failed to successfully  complete  the
Substance Abuse Reorientation and Treatment Program (SART).

     On or about 21 Jan 96 and 9 Feb 96, applicant failed to obey a
lawful general regulation by  wrongfully  consuming  alcohol  while
under the legal drinking  age  of  21.   For  this  misconduct,  he
received a letter of reprimand.

On that same date, applicant acknowledged receipt of the  discharge
notification and after consulting with counsel, waived his right to
submit statements in his own behalf.  On 22 Feb 96, the staff judge
advocate found the case  file  legally  sufficient  to  justify  an
administrative discharge for failure in alcohol abuse treatment and
recommended that the applicant be discharged with a general  (under
honorable   conditions)   discharge,    without    probation    and
rehabilitation.  On  7 Mar 96,  the  discharge  authority  directed
applicant be discharged with a general (under honorable conditions)
discharge.

On 20 May 96, the applicant was discharged under the provisions  of
AFI 36-3208 by  reason  of  alcohol  rehabilitation  failure,  with
service characterized as general (under honorable conditions),  and
was issued RE code 2B.  He served 1 year, 9 months, and 10 days  on
active duty.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommended applicant’s request be denied.  Based  on
available documentation in  the  file,  they  found  the  discharge
consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of  the
discharge regulation.  Additionally, the discharge was  within  the
sound discretion of  the  discharge  authority.   They  also  noted
applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or
injustices that occurred in the discharge processing  and  provided
no other facts warranting a change to his reenlistment  eligibility
code or his narrative reason for separation.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to  the  applicant
on 30 Apr 04 for review and comment within 30  days.   As  of  this
date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D).

___________________________________________________________________

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.   The  discharge
appears to be in compliance with the governing AFI and we  find  no
evidence to indicate that applicant’s  reason  for  separation  was
inappropriate.  Additionally, 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.
 Applicant’s RE code of  2B  accurately  reflects  his  involuntary
separation with a general (under honorable  conditions)  discharge.
We find no evidence of error in  this  case  and  after  thoroughly
reviewing the documentation that has been submitted in  support  of
applicant’s appeal, we do not  believe  he  has  suffered  from  an
injustice.  Based on the foregoing, and in the absence of  evidence
to the contrary, we find no basis upon which to recommend favorable
action on this application.

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-2004-00682 in Executive  Session  on  8  July  2004,  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Gregory H. Petkoff, Panel Chair
      Ms. Martha A. Maust, Member
      Mr. Robert H. Altman, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 24 Feb 04, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 27 Apr 04.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Apr 04.



                                   GREGORY H. PETKOFF
                                   Panel Chair