RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-03592
		INDEX CODE:  100.3, 100.06 

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED: NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed to allow enlistment in the Reserves.
___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He is interested in joining the Reserves due to current world events.  The applicant states that at the time of his discharge, his daughter, who was four years old, had recently died and it was a very emotional time in his life.  He states that his wife also had difficulty dealing with their daughters death and decided to take their other two children and leave.  The applicant states that he felt alone and started to drink.  He realizes that this was the wrong way to approach his personal problems.  He declares that he has been sober for years and would like to have his RE code changed.  

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 29 April 1982 in the grade of airman basic.  On 28 December 1990, the applicant was notified by his commander that he was recommending that he be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 35-10, Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure, with an honorable discharge.  The specific reason for his action was his failure to complete a resident alcohol abuse rehabilitation (ARC) program by refusing to enter.  The applicant had numerous incidents involving alcohol and had been entered into various alcohol rehabilitation programs but continued to drink.  He was evaluated by Social Actions and they recommended in-patient treatment; however, he refused to enter in the program. On 28 December 1990 the applicant submitted a conditional waiver to an administrative review board contingent on receiving no less than an honorable discharge.  The case was reviewed on 31 December 1990 by the Assistant Staff Judge Advocate and found to be legally sufficient to support discharge.  He was separated from the Air Force on 11 January 1991 with a honorable discharge an issued a RE code of “2C”.  He served eight (8) years, nine (9) months and ten (10) days on active duty. 

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  Based upon the documentation in the file, we believe the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  The applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.  A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPAE recommends denial.  The RE code of 2C, “Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry-level separation without characterization of service” is correct.  A complete copy of the DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit D.
___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 3 January 2003 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.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.  We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  Therefore, 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 AFBCMR Docket Number 02-03592 in Executive Session on 12 March 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 7 Nov 02. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 10 Dec 02.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 18 Dec 02.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Jan 03.