RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-03841
		INDEX CODE:  100.03

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED: NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His separation code and his reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He feels that changing the codes is right.  If the need arises he would then be able to enter a Reserve unit to assist our country in its fight against terrorism.    He can live with them as they are, but they are an inaccurate reflection on him as a person and were nothing but an attack on a young man that only needed mature leadership.

In support of his appeal, applicant submitted a personal statement.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 9 Jan 81 for a period of 4 years.  Prior to the events under review, he was promoted to the grade of airman first class (A1C/E-3) with an effective date and date of rank (DOR) of 7 Jul 82.

A resume of applicant’s airman performance reports (APRs) follows:

	      PERIOD CLOSING			OVERALL EVALUATION

			08 Jan 82							7
			14 Jul 82							5
			14 Jul 83							4

On 25 Jul 83, the squadron commander initiated administrative discharge action against the applicant for misconduct; specifically, minor disciplinary infractions.  The specific reasons for the proposed action were:

On 12 Jan 83, he failed to go to his appointed place of duty, for which he received an Article 15.  He was restricted to the base and ordered to perform extra duty for 14 days.

On 23 Mar 83, he operated a tug in a reckless manner, for which he received a letter of reprimand.

On 31 Mar 83, he failed to follow instructions given by his Shop Chief for which he received a letter of reprimand and establishment of an unfavorable information file (UIF).

On 8 May 83, he operated a vehicle which was not properly registered, for which he received an Article 15.  He was restricted to the base for 14 days, ordered to perform extra duty for 14 days and fined $100.

Also, he received records of counseling for failing to meet AFR 35-10 standards on two occasions, 24 Sep 82 and 13 May 83.  He received records of counseling on six occasions (11 Aug 82, 5 and 6 Jan 83, 4 May 83, and 10 and 11 May 83) for failure to meet AFR 39-6 Responsibilities.

On 5 Aug 83, after consulting with counsel and having been advised of his rights, applicant submitted documents in his own behalf.  

On 11 Aug 83, the Staff Judge Advocate found the case file legally sufficient to justify an administrative discharge for misconduct and recommended that the applicant be separated with a general discharge, without probation or rehabilitation.  On 12 Aug 83, the discharge authority approved a general discharge, without probation and rehabilitation.

On 29 Aug 83, the applicant received a general (under honorable conditions) discharge, under the provisions of AFR 39-10, with separation code JKN (Misconduct - Pattern of Minor Disciplinary Infractions), and was issued RE Code 2B (involuntarily separated under AFR 39-10, with a general discharge).  He served 2 years, 7 months, and 21 days on active duty.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS reviewed this application and recommended denial.  They found that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  Additionally, that the discharge was within the sound discretion of the discharge authority.  They also noted that the applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing nor did he provide any facts warranting an upgrade of the discharge.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

HQ AFPC/DPPAE also reviewed this application and indicated that the RE code of 2B, “Involuntarily separated with a general or under other than honorable conditions discharge” 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 14 Feb 03 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit E).
___________________________________________________________________

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.  We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case.  The discharge appears to be in compliance with the governing regulations and we find no evidence to indicate that his separation from the Air Force was inappropriate.  At the time of his separation from the Air Force, he was furnished an RE Code predicated upon the quality of his service and the circumstances surrounding his separation.  The assigned code reflects the Air Force’s position regarding whether or not, or under what circumstances, he should be allowed to reenlist.  His RE code of 2B accurately reflects that he was involuntarily separated with a general discharge.  After reviewing the evidence of record, the applicant’s overall quality of service and the events which precipitated his separation from the Air Force, we find no evidence to indicate that either the assigned separation code or the RE code are in error or unjust.  Absent 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 02-03841 in Executive Session on 7 May 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 26 Nov 02, w/atch. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 20 Dec 02.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAE, dated 4 Feb 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Feb 03.