RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2008-02290
            INDEX CODE:  100.06

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NOT INDICATED

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2H (Participating in Track 4
or 5 of the Substance Abuse Reorientation and Treatment (SART) program
for alcohol, or has failed to complete Track 4) be changed to one that
can be waived.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He successfully completed alcohol rehabilitation  while  stationed  at
Kadena Air Base, Japan.

In support of  his  appeal,  the  applicant  provides  copies  of  his
separation document and medical records.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant’s available military  personnel  records  indicate  that  he
enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 15 Oct 1984.   He  was  honorably
discharged on 29 Aug 94 under the provisions of AFR  39-10  (Reduction
in Force) and assigned an RE code of 2H.  He  was  credited  with  ten
years, one month, and ten days of total active service.

The remaining  relevant  facts  pertaining  to  this  application  are
contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the  Air
Force, which is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The  AFBCMR  Medical  Consultant  recommends  denial  indicating  that
individuals who have been entered into an alcohol  rehabilitation  and
treatment program, then  either  fails  to  complete  the  program  or
demonstrates evidence of recurrent use of alcohol  after  entering  or
completing a program, are generally considered treatment failures  and
are eligible for an involuntary release from military service.  In the
case under review, the applicant’s narrative reason for discharge does
not reflect failure in an alcohol  treatment  program.   However,  the
applicant’s RE code is indicative of his record of recurrent  alcohol-
related incidents,  which  likely  contributed  to  his  candidacy  or
vulnerability for being released from military service, and prohibited
his  reenlistment.   Although   the   applicant   contends   that   he
successfully completed alcohol rehabilitation prior to separation, the
evidence of record indicated recurring incidents involving alcohol use
requiring referrals, initially to a seminar, followed  by  entry  into
Track II and Track III programs, and culminating  with  an  in-patient
treatment program.  According to the Medical Consultant, at  the  time
of  the  applicant’s  discharge,  the   discharge   authority   likely
recognized his previous history of alcohol dependence  and  determined
that he would be a poor quality force risk for retention and/or future
reentry into military service.  However, the Medical  Consultant  also
acknowledges that alcohol dependence need not be a  lifelong  illness,
and that since the applicant’s  discharge,  he  may  have  achieved  a
durable remission.  The Medical Consultant states he found no  current
objective  medical  evidence  the  applicant  has  sustained  a   full
remission of his alcohol dependence to  the  extent  that  warrants  a
change in his RE code.  He also did not find an error or injustice  in
the assignment of the RE code.

A complete copy of the Medical Consultant’s evaluation is  at  Exhibit
C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to  applicant  on  29
Sep 08 for review and response 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  applicant's  complete
submission was thoroughly  reviewed  and  his  contentions  were  duly
noted.  However, we do not find  the  applicant’s  assertions  or  the
documentation  presented  in  support  of  his   appeal   sufficiently
persuasive  to  override  the  rationale  provided  by   the   Medical
Consultant.  We note the Secretary of  the  Air  Force  has  statutory
authority  to  promulgate  rules   and   regulations   governing   the
administration of the Air Force.  In the exercise of  that  authority,
the Secretary has determined that members separated from the Air Force
would be furnished an RE code predicated upon  the  quality  of  their
service and circumstances of their separation.  No evidence  has  been
presented that  convinces  us  the  applicant’s  RE  code  of  2H  was
inappropriately assigned or inaccurately reflected  the  circumstances
of his separation.  In view of the foregoing, and in  the  absence  of
sufficient evidence to the contrary, we agree with the  recommendation
of the Medical Consultant and adopt his rationale as the basis for our
decision  the  applicant  has  failed  to  sustain   his   burden   of
establishing that he has suffered either an  error  or  an  injustice.
Accordingly, we find no compelling basis  to  recommend  granting  the
relief sought in this application.

_________________________________________________________________

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-
2008-02290 in Executive Session on 6 Nov 08, under the  provisions  of
AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Laurence M. Groner, Panel Chair
      Ms. Janet I. Hassan, Member
      Mr. James L. Sommer, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 17 Jun 08, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, Medical Consultant, dated 26 Sep 08.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Sep 08.




                                   LAURENCE M. GRONER
                                   Panel Chair