RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-01265
            INDEX NUMBER:  131.02
            COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  YES


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  27 OCTOBER 2007


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  His rank of technical sergeant (E-6) be restored with all back  pay  and
allowances up through the date the Board decides his case.

2.  His administrative demotion and all documents relating to  his  demotion
be removed from his records.

3.  He receive promotion consideration to  master  sergeant  beginning  with
cycle 06E7.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was never provided clarification on what NCO responsibilities  he  failed
to fulfill.  He believes action under the UCMJ would have clearly been  more
appropriate, especially  in  light  of  the  fact  that  his  Driving  While
Intoxicated (DWI) offense, when committed on Pope  AFB,  is  addressed  with
non-judicial  punishment.   He  strongly  feels  that  demotion  action  was
inappropriate in light of his entire military record.   His  service  record
speaks for itself and at the time of his demotion he had almost 14 years  of
exemplary service.  He continues to perform in an outstanding  manner  while
waiting for his restoration  eligibility  window.   He  was  told  the  wing
policy for off-base DUI is a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) and establishment  of
an Unfavorable Information File (UIF).  The  demotion  was  carried  through
despite his outstanding service record simply to  make  an  example  out  of
him.

In  support  of  his  request,  applicant  provides  a  personal  statement,
Enlisted Evaluation Reports, Letters of Appreciation and documents  relating
to his demotion.  The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments,  is
at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving in the Regular Air Force in the grade  of
staff sergeant,  effective,  and  with  a  DOR  of  23 November  2004.   The
Military Personnel Database  (MilPDS)  indicates  the  applicant's  Enlisted
Performance Reports for the periods ending 2 August 1999 through 8  February
2006 reflect an overall evaluation of "5."

On 6 October 2004, the applicant received  an  LOR  for  operating  a  motor
vehicle under the influence of alcohol and possessing an open  container  of
alcohol in the passenger area.  The LOR was filed in his UIF.

On 3 November 2004, the applicant was notified of  the  demotion  action  in
accordance with AFI 36-2503, paragraph  4.2,  for  failure  to  fulfill  NCO
responsibilities, for driving while under the influence.

Per Special Order AA-50, dated 23 December 2004, the applicant  was  demoted
from the grade of TSgt(E-6) to the grade of SSgt(E-5) with a  date  of  rank
(DOR) of 24 November 2004.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPWB recommends denial.  DPPPWB advises the commander was within  his
authority to administratively demote the applicant for  failure  to  fulfill
NCO responsibilities.  The AFCP/DPPPWB complete evaluation is at Exhibit B.

AFPC/JA recommends denial.  JA advises that notwithstanding the  applicant's
argument on the administrative demotion instruction provision "AFR  39-6  no
longer exists," it is entirely appropriate for the  promotion  authority  to
administratively demote the applicant after considering his off-base DUI  in
the context of his entire career.  Contrary to the  applicant's  contention,
no  evidence  exists  to  substantiate  a  command   policy   existed   that
demonstrated "an inelastic  attitude  and  predisposition"  to  how  drunken
driving offenses will be treated in that organization.  JA  further  advises
that the commander made  a  sound  decision  in  taking  the  administrative
demotion action because of the serious criminal nature  of  the  applicant's
drunken driving offense.  The AFPC/JA complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to  the  applicant  on  2
June 2006 for review and comment within 30 days.   As  of  this  date,  this
office has not received a response.

_________________________________________________________________



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 error or injustice.  The applicant's  complete  submission  was
thoroughly reviewed and his contentions were duly  noted.   However,  we  do
not find the applicant’s uncorroborated assertions  sufficiently  persuasive
to override the rationale provided by  the  Air  Force  offices  of  primary
responsibility.   The  evidence  of  record  indicates  the  applicant   was
administratively demoted to staff sergeant (E-5) for failure to fulfill  NCO
responsibilities which stemmed from his Driving While Intoxicated charge  by
the state of North Carolina.  Other than his own assertions,  the  applicant
has provided no evidence, which would lead us to believe  he  did  otherwise
or that the actions taken to effect his demotion were improper.   Therefore,
the Board is not inclined to restore his rank of technical  sergeant  absent
a strong showing that the commander who imposed the administrative  demotion
abused his discretionary authority.  Accordingly, the Board  concludes  that
no basis exists to recommend  relief.   Likewise,  we  do  not  believe  his
request to receive  promotion  consideration  to  master  sergeant  warrants
favorable consideration.

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 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  Docket  Number  BC-2006-01265
in Executive Session on 8 August 2006 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
                 Mr. John E. Pettit, Member
                 Mr. James A. Wolffe, Member
The following documentary evidence  pertaining  to  Docket  Number  BC-2006-
01265 was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 22 Mar 06, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 3 May 06.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/JA, dated 26 May 06.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 2 Jun 06.




                                   CHARLENE M. BRADLEY

                                   Panel Chair