RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2008-00286
            INDEX CODE: 110.03
            COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

She be reinstated to the grade of captain.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

In 2005, she received an Article 15, non-judicial  punishment  for  drinking
too much in public and for failure to return  back  to  duty.   She  is  not
making excuses for her failure to act as a professional officer nor  is  she
disputing the Article 15, she is asking that she not  be  punished  for  the
remainder of her life.  She later  discovered  the  Senior  Non-Commissioned
Officer (SNCO) that she was with at the time (who also received  punishment)
received her rank back within six months after  receiving  the  Article  15.
She made a  mistake  and  has  accepted  responsibility  for  that  mistake.
However, she feels that she has been treated  unjustly.   The  injustice  is
punishing her for the rest of her life  with  no  redemption  and  the  SNCO
received her rank back in record time.  Up until this  incident  her  record
has been spotless.  Over 20 years of enlisted and  officer  duties  with  an
impeccable record should count for something.

In support of her request, the  applicant  provided  a  personal  statement,
documents extracted from her military personnel  records,  and  a  personnel
data system printout.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant's military personnel records were not  made  available.   Data
extracted  from  documents  provided  by  the  applicant  reflects  she  was
progressively promoted to the grade of captain, having  assumed  that  grade
effective and with a date of rank of 9 December 2003.

On 18 April  2006,  the  applicant  received  nonjudicial  punishment  under
Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for the  following
offenses:

      a. She did without authority, absent herself from her  place  of  duty
until 1 November 2005.

      b. On or about 1 November 2005, with intent to  deceive,  she  made  a
false official statement to her supervisor.

      c. On or about 31 October 2005, she was drunk and disorderly while  in
uniform, during the duty day, to the disgrace of the armed forces.

      d. On or  about  31  October  2005,  she  wrongfully  failed  to  take
adequate affirmative steps, as the senior ranking officer present  to  bring
an end to the misconduct being committed by an enlisted subordinate, and  to
otherwise permanently, remove herself from  the  presence  of  the  enlisted
member and civilians, all of whom were committing  indecent  and  disorderly
acts.

      e. On or about 31 October 2005,  she  knowingly  fraternized  with  an
enlisted person, on terms  of  military  equality,  by  engaging  in  drunk,
disorderly and indecent conduct in uniform and in  public  in  violation  of
the custom of  the  Air  Force  that  officers  shall  not  fraternize  with
enlisted persons on terms of military equality.

      f. On or about 31 October 2005, she wrongfully committed  an  indecent
act by kissing an enlisted member and civilian on their  lips,  rubbing  the
breasts of the civilian and placing her hands  on  or  near  the  groins  of
both, all while she and the enlisted member were in uniform  in  the  public
dining area.

The applicant's punishment consisted of a forfeiture of  $2,620.00  pay  per
month for two months and a reprimand.  She did not  appeal  the  punishment.
The Article 15 was filed in the  applicant's  Unfavorable  Information  File
(UIF).

In conjunction with her application for retirement, IAW section  1370(d)(1),
Title 10, U.S.C., an Officer Grade Determination (OGD)  was  conducted.   On
19  January  2007,  the  Secretary  of  the  Air  Force  Personnel   Council
determined the  applicant  served  satisfactorily  in  the  grade  of  first
lieutenant and that she should be retired in that grade.

The applicant was placed on the Reserve Retired  List  effective  19 January
2007 in the grade of first lieutenant.

_________________________________________________________________




AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFRC/A1E recommends denial.  A1E states the applicant's retirement  rank  of
first lieutenant (0-2) is in fact accurate.   The  current  retirement  rank
was appropriately processed for determination and final decision up  to  the
SAF.  A command administrative  review  processing  procedure  was  followed
supporting this action and her transfer to Retired Reserve.   The  applicant
was afforded due process in accordance with the command  administrative  OGD
review processing procedures.  The final result  of  her  command  OGD  case
ending in the fact, that  "the  Secretary  finds  the  applicant  did  serve
satisfactorily in the grade of first lieutenant within the  meaning  of  the
provision of law (Section 1370(d)(1), Title  10,  United  States  Code)  and
directs that she be transferred to the retired reserve in that  grade."   As
such, and given that  the  applicant  has  not  provided  any  documentation
substantiative in nature or otherwise, that would support a  command  change
in  position  on  this  case;  disapproval   of   applicant's   request   is
appropriate.

The complete A1E evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed the evaluation and states she has  learned  from  her
mistake.  With one afternoon of misjudgment  -  she  ruined  a  spotless  20
years of hard work and dedication to the United States Air Force.

The applicant's complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

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 an error or injustice.  The applicant is  requesting  that  the
determination of the Secretary of the Air force Personnel Council  that  she
did not serve satisfactorily in the grade of  captain  be  reversed.   After
careful consideration of the applicant's submission along with the  evidence
of record, we are not persuaded that  an  error  or  injustice  exists  that
requires correction.  The applicant has not submitted evidence showing  that
the  statutorily  required  OGD  action  was  inappropriate  or   that   the
determination of the Secretary's designee was erroneous.   Further,  we  are
not persuaded by her assertion of being "punished for the rest of her  life"
of the existence of an injustice in this case.   Therefore,  we  agree  with
the  opinion  and  recommendation  of  the  Air  force  office  of   primary
responsibility  and  adopt  the  rationale  expressed  as  basis   for   our
conclusion that she has failed  to  sustain  her  burden  of  proof  of  the
existence of either an error or injustice in this case.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented  did  not  demonstrate  the
existence of an error or an injustice; the application was denied without  a
personal appearance; and 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-2008-
00286 in Executive Session on 6 May 2008, under the provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                 Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Vance E. Lineberger, Member
                 Mr. Don H. Kendrick, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 31 December 2007, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFRC/A1E, dated 3 March 2008, w/atchs.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 March 2008.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 30 March 2008, w/atchs.





                       KATHLEEN F. GRAHAM
                       Panel Chair