RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBERS: 02-00157
		INDEX CODE 100.06  110.02
		COUNSELS: None

	 	HEARING DESIRED: Yes

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His 1985 general discharge be upgraded to honorable and his reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of “2B” (Separated with a general or under-other-than-honorable conditions discharge) be changed so that he can enlist in the Army.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was a naïve 21-year-old and has no excuse for his stupidity. He believes his commander took advantage of his youth and fears. He wants to serve his country.  He provides two character references as support.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 17 Jun 82. During the period in question, he was a sergeant assigned to the 392nd Information Systems Group at Vandenberg AFB, CA as a telecommunications operator/center specialist.  His Enlisted Performance Reports (EPRs) reflect overall ratings of 9.  

In the course of an investigation, the applicant made a sworn statement on 27 Feb 86 to the Office of Special Investigations (OSI) that he had engaged in homosexual acts with another male while in the Vandenberg dormitory in Jul 85.  As a result, his NCO status was vacated and he received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) on 14 Apr 86.  

On 22 Apr 86, the applicant’s commander recommended him for general discharge for commission of a serious offense, specifically, sodomy.  The applicant consulted counsel but waived his right to submit statements.  The case was found legally sufficient on 23 Apr 86 and, on 29 Apr 86, the discharge authority directed the applicant’s separation.

The applicant was separated on 5 May 86 in the grade of airman first class with a general discharge for Misconduct-Other Serious Offenses, and an RE code of “2B.”  He had 3 years, 8 months and 19 days of active service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS provided their rationale for recommending denial.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

HQ AFPC/DPPAE confirmed that the applicant’s RE code is correct.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Complete copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 21 Jun 02 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this office has received no response. 

_________________________________________________________________

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.  After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his discharge should be upgraded and his RE code changed. Applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, we do not find these uncorroborated assertions, in and by themselves, sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air Force. We therefore agree with the recommendations of the Air Force and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of having suffered either an error or an injustice. In view of the above and absent persuasive 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 this application in Executive Session on 6 August 2002 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number 02-00157 was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 28 Dec 01, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 25 Feb 02.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAE, dated 13 Jun 02.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Jun 02.