RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-01902

	        	COUNSEL:  NONE

	        	HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His separation code of KBK and reenlistment (RE) code of 2x be changed in order to allow him to be eligible to reenlist in the Air Force Reserve. 
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The reasons the applicant believes the records to be in error or unjust and the evidence submitted in support of the appeal are at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force as an airman basic on 4 October 1993 for a term of 4 years.  The applicant was separated for completion of required active service with a separation code of KBK and a RE code of 2X on 3 October 1997 in the grade of airman.  He served 4 years of total active service.

On 9 December 1995, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intent to impose nonjudicial punishment upon him for the following offense: for treating, with disrespectful language, a superior noncommissioned officer.  He was reduced to airman, forfeiture of $223 and 10 days extra duty with suspension of punishment until 17 June 1996.  However, in March 1996 the nonjudicial punishment was remitted because on or about         12 February 1996 he failed to obey a direct order to pay the balance on his government American Express Travel card.  He was reduced to airman, ordered to pay $223 and received 10 extra days of duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial.  The applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.  Additionally, the applicant provided no facts warranting a change in his narrative reason for separation. He has not filed a timely request.

AFPC/DPPRS complete evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPAE recommended denial.  The applicant was discharged upon completion of required active service with an honorable discharge and an RE code of 2X, because he was not selected for reenlistment under the SRP.

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Complete copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to applicant on 2 August 2002 for review and comment within 30 days.  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 an error or injustice.  After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his discharge separation and reenlistment code should be 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.  Other than his own statement, applicant provides no persuasive evidence that he was unfairly or incorrectly discharged.  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 that he has suffered either an error or an injustice.  Therefore, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of probable 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 02-01902 on 16 October 2002 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 31 Oct 01, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 2 Jul 02.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAE dated 30 Jul 02
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR dated 2 Aug 02.

                                   Panel Chairman