RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01887
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His records be corrected to reflect:
1. His demotion to airman first class (E-3) be removed
from his record, his grade of senior airman (E-4) be restored.
2. His name be removed from the Quality Force Review Board
(QFRB) list and he be retained on active duty and he be
reassigned to another base.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was arrested for driving while under the influence (DUI) and
his commander administered punishment before the civil court
findings were rendered. The civil court dismissed his DUI.
Since his DUI was dismissed by the civil court, he believes the
punishment rendered by his commander should be removed.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 22 Jul 08, the applicant commenced his enlistment in the
Regular Air Force.
On 9 Jun 13, the applicant was apprehended by civilian police
for operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of
alcohol. His blood alcohol level at the time of arrest was 0.18
percent.
On 2 Aug 13, the applicants commander initiated a demotion
action. The applicant was demoted to the grade of airman first
class with a DOR of 15 Aug 13.
The applicant received a referral enlisted performance report
(EPR) for the period 22 Mar 13 thru 21 Mar 14. He received a
Does Not Meet in Section II, Block 2 due to comments relating
to him receiving an LOR and a demotion.
The applicants commander initiated an AF Form 3538E, Enlisted
Retention Recommendation, and did not recommend he be retained
on active duty. The commander noted the applicant had numerous
disciplinary issues and was demoted for failing to me his
responsibilities as an airman.
The applicants civil DUI case was dismissed upon him attending
six Alcohol Anonymous meetings, completion of an online
defensive driving course, completion of ten hours of community
service, and payment of the fine and court costs.
On 5 May 14, QFRB convened and determined the applicant should
not be retained on active duty.
On 29 Sep 14, the applicant was furnished an honorable
discharge, and was credited with six years, two months, and
eight days of active service.
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of
an error or an injustice. The applicant requests his demotion
to airman first class be removed and his grade be reinstated to
senior airman. The applicant was demoted because he failed to
fulfill his responsibilities by DUI with a blood alcohol level
of 0.18 percent and not because he was found guilty or convicted
by trial.
A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit C.
AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of
an error or an injustice. The applicant is requesting removal
from the QFRB list to be allowed to remain on active duty.
However, the applicants commander had the obligation and
authority to administer further administrative actions against
the applicant. The QFRB reviewed the applicants entire record
and determined he could not be retained.
A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit D.
AFPC/JA recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an
error or an injustice and concurs with the findings of
AFPC/DPSOE. The applicants demotion action was initiated due
to his DUI with a blood alcohol level of 0.18. The applicant
has not contested he was DUI, the results of his blood alcohol
test, or that his DUI is a legal basis for demotion. However,
he believes that the dismissal of the DUI by the civil court
should have prevented his commander from initiating the demotion
and subsequent non-retention recommendation. It appears the
conditions for the applicants dismissal are consistent with a
plea bargain in the civilian court system and is common for
first time offenders. However, this should not be confused with
an outright dismissal of a charge; the charges were not
dismissed due to him being found not guilty or innocent, but
only to facilitate a deferred adjudication.
Under the provision AFR 36-2502, Airman Promotion/Demotion
Programs, a conviction is not required in order for the
commander to determine whether an airman has failed his
responsibilities. The result of the applicants blood alcohol
test was sufficient evidence that he failed his responsibilities
as an airman. The actions of the civil court do not affect the
validity of the actions taken by the Air Force.
A complete copy of the AFPC/JA evaluation is at Exhibit E.
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the
applicant on 27 Oct 14 for review and comment within 30 days
(Exhibit F). As of this date, no response has been received by
this office.
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. We took
notice of the applicants complete submission in judging the
merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and
recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary
responsibility (OPR) and adopt their rationale as the basis for
our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error
or injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the
contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested
relief.
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of material error or 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-2014-01887 in Executive Session on 24 Feb 15 under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 20 May 14, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 11 Jun 14.
Exhibit D. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 28 Aug 14.
Exhibit E. Memorandum, AFPC/JA, dated 24 Sep 14.
Exhibit F. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Oct 14.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05227
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR) at Exhibits C, D, and E. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/JA recommends the applicants request be approved and that his re-entry (RE) code be updated once the lost time is removed from his records. At the same time, the applicant requested that his lost time be re-calculated; however, as the commander non-concurred with his request, the lost...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01988
Any duty that requires him to report his arrest for DUI violates his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. On 10 Oct 12, the applicants commander issued him an LOR for failing to report his arrest to his security officer as required by DoD Regulation 5200.2-R, paragraph C9.1.4. On 11 Mar 13, in response to a request from the applicant, his referral EPR was amended to remove reference to the DUI, however, the EPR remained an overall 3 based upon the applicants failure to...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01655
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPRs), which are attached at Exhibits C, D, and E. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial. Based upon the presumed sufficiency of the LOR/UIF/demotion action as served to the applicant, they conclude that its mention on the contested report was proper and in accordance with all applicable Air Force policies and procedures. A...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02460
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02460 COUNSEL: NONE INDICATED HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His involuntary separation decision by the Quality Force Review Board (QFRB) be declared void and removed from his records. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His AF Form 910, Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) (AB thru TSgt), rendered for the period 13 August 2013 thru 1 March 2014 was not considered by the QFRB...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00202
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00202 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His administrative demotion to the grade of Airman First Class (A1C/E-3) be removed from his record and he be restored to his prior rank of Senior Airman (SrA/E-4). On 19 Mar 12, after reviewing the written statement submitted by the applicant and meeting with the applicant in person, the applicants commander...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02310
On 6 Jan 10, he was driving when he dropped his cell phone. The complete DPSOE 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 8 Sep 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and...
In off- base DUI cases, like the applicant's, only administrative actions may be taken. According to JA, the procedures set forth in the applicable Air Force regulations were followed in this case, that the evidence supported the actions taken, and that there was no legal error or injustice in this case. Based on the applicant being initially charged with driving under the influence of alcohol, speeding, and erratic driving by the police, his immediate W Commander that his commander...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04992
On 9 May 2012, the applicant submitted an additional response to his denial of reenlistment and demotion action because he indicated that he just received the ROI. On 19 September 2012, by authority of the Secretary of the Air Force, his 3 August 2012 request for redress filed under Article 138 was denied as the actions taken by the command were determined to be appropriate to the circumstances. The applicants discharge was correctly administered on the basis of his RE code of 2X (denied...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03563
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPWB recommended denial noting the applicant was administratively demoted from TSgt to SrA with a DOR of 15 Jul 03. His commander also served him with a letter of reprimand (LOR), established an unfavorable information file (UIF), and his name was placed on a control roster for this conviction. Applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03407
JA states the applicant’s retainability was established by AFI 36-2131, upon accession onto active duty under the protections of sanctuary. If between 1 July 1996 to 21 September 1996 he served on active duty, he could retire in a higher grade under 10 U.S.C 8963. Although he did not specifically request retirement in the highest grade held while on active duty; we have been advised that it has been determined that he served satisfactorily in the grade of MSgt and is eligible to retire in...