RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-00973
				INDEX CODE:  110.00
	APPICANT	COUNSEL:  None

SSN			HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed to allow him to enlist in the Army.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His misconduct while on active duty was detrimental to good order and discipline of the Air Force, but it was not criminal in nature nor did it reflect negatively on the Air Force.  His immaturity contributed to resentment and a personality conflict with an individual who demanded respect but no way tried to earn it.  He desires to serve his county in the US Army and upgrading his RE code will aid him in pursuing his dream.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force as an airman basic on 1 Jul 94 for a period of four (4) years.

On 26 Jul 96, the applicant's commander recommended him for discharge for unsatisfactory duty performance and misconduct.  The reasons for the discharge action are:

		a.  On 13 Jan 95, the applicant was late for work and received a record of individual counseling.

		b.  The applicant, on 6 Feb 95, reported late for work and received a record of individual counseling.

		c.  On 17 May 95, the applicant received a letter of reprimand for failure to go to his appointed place of duty.

		d.  The applicant on 18 Jul 95, failed to report to his place of duty at the appointed time and received a letter of reprimand and an unfavorable information file was established.

		e.  On 17 Aug 95, the applicant failed to properly inventory and account for tools in his toolbox.  He received a record of individual counseling on 22 Aug 95 for this incident.

		f.  On 29 Aug 95, the applicant received a record of individual counseling for not properly accounting for tools in his toolbox on 28 Aug 95.

		g.  On 11 Oct 95, the applicant received a record of individual counseling for not completing Volume II of his CDC's on time.

		h.  On 4 Jan 96, the applicant failed to complete Volume IV of his CDC's on time and received a letter of reprimand on 7 Feb 96.

		i.  On 6 May 96, the applicant failed to pay a debt to AAFES and received a letter of reprimand on 14 May 96.

		j.  The applicant, on 4 Jun 96, intentionally made a false statement to SSgt Y. P. and on 5 Jun 96, he failed to go to his appointed place of duty.  For these incidents he received an Article 15 on 28 Jun 96.

		k.  The applicant failed a dorm room inspection on 16 Jul 96 and received a letter of reprimand on 19 Jul 96.

		l.  The applicant, on or about 24 Jul 96, received a failing score of 57 on his Career Development End of Course Test.

The applicant was discharged on 9 Aug 96, for misconduct and received an under honorable conditions (general) discharge.  He served 2 years, 1 month and 9 days of active service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS states based upon the information in the applicant's case file, they believe his discharge was processed within the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and his discharge was within the sound 
discretion of the discharge authority.  They further state the applicant has not submitted any new evidence identifying any errors or injustices that occurred during the processing of his discharge.  They recommend denying the requested relief (Exhibit C).

HQ AFPC/DPPAE states the applicant received a reenlistment eligibility code of "2B," indicating the member was separated with a general or under other than honorable conditions discharge which is correct (Exhibit D).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 7 Jun 02, for review and response.  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 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 careful consideration of the circumstances of this case and the evidence provided by the applicant, we are not persuaded that the discharge action and the resulting reenlistment code he received were in error or unjust.  Applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  The applicant admits while on active duty his misconduct was detrimental to good order and discipline of the Air Force, and while it was not criminal in nature, his misconduct did not exhibit the integrity, character, and professionalism required of a member in the Air Force.  Therefore, based on the applicant's overall performance while on active duty, it would appear the reason he was issued the contested RE code is substantiated.  In view of the above and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, 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 this application in Executive Session on 22 August 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 11 Mar 02, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.	Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 4 Apr 02.
	Exhibit D.	Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAE, dated 28 May 02.
	Exhibit D.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Jun 02.