RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: 01-02664

	 	COUNSEL:  NONE

	 	HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) Code be upgraded to allow him the opportunity to reenlist into the military.

_________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The disciplinary actions taken against him for an incident that occurred on 13 December 1998 were extreme.

The applicant states that the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) has upgraded his discharge; however, they were unable to upgrade his RE Code.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant reenlisted in the Regular Air Force on 1 October 1998 for a period of six years.  His Total Active Federal Military Service Date (TAFMSD) is 28 September 1995.

On 5 April 1999, the Office of Special Investigation (OSI) completed an investigation into the applicant’s alleged aggravated assault of a civilian during which he allegedly shot the civilian.

On 26 April 1999, he was charged with two specifications of carrying a concealed weapon and one specification of making a false official statement, in violation of Articles 134 and 107 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).  Specifically, that he unlawfully carried a concealed weapon (i.e., 9mm handgun) on 13 December 1999; that he unlawfully carried a concealed weapon (i.e., 38 caliber pistol and a speed loader with five rounds) on 6 January 1999; and that on 6 January 1999, with intent to deceive, he made a false official statement to an OSI agent by denying that he had purchased or owned a 9mm semi-automatic handgun, or that he had shot anyone.

He requested discharge in lieu of court-martial on 4 May 1999 and acknowledged that if his request was approved, his service would be characterized as Under Other than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC).

The discharge authority approved his request for discharge on 14 May 1999.

He was discharged on 8 June 1999 under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Discharge in Lieu of Court Martial), with service characterized as UOTHC, and was issued an RE Code of 2B (Separated with General or UOTHC discharge).  He completed 3 years, 8 months, and 10 days of active service.

On 1 February 2002, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered the applicant’s requests that his discharge be upgraded to honorable, the reason and authority for his discharge be changed, and his RE Code be changed.  The AFDRB found no impropriety to warrant upgrading his discharge to honorable; however, they found that his character of service was more appropriately described as general.  The AFDRB denied the remainder of his requests.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPAE has reviewed the applicant’s case file and states, in part, that the RE Code of 2B is correct.

The AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed the evaluation and provides a copy of his present employment job description and extracts from his records.

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 error or injustice to warrant upgrading his RE Code. In this respect, we note that the applicant’s discharge appears to be in compliance with the governing Air Force Instruction in effect at the time of his separation and that he was afforded all the rights to which entitled.  We note that the Air Force Discharge Review Board has upgraded to the characterization of the applicant’s service to general (under honorable conditions).  However, he provides no evidence that his separation was inappropriate or that the assigned RE Code reflecting his involuntary separation was in error or unjust.  There being insufficient evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought.

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 issue(s) 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 Docket Number 01-02664 in Executive Session on 15 August 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

				Vice Chair
				Member
				Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 22 Aug 01, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 28 May 02.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Jun 02.
	Exhibit E.  Applicant’s Response, w/atchs.