RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01211
		INDEX CODE:  110.02

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED: NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code 2Y (a second term or career airman who has been denied appointment to NCO status, or has had NCO status vacated) be changed to a code which will permit him to reenlist in the Air Force Reserve or Air National Guard.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

At the time of his separation he was told there would be nothing barring him from further military duty.  After his separation his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, was reissued without his knowledge preventing him from further military service.  Had he known of this, he would have continued his enlistment in the Air Force.

He states he has attended college and received a degree in Information Systems and is currently working on his Master’s degree.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 17 Apr 86 in the grade of airman basic for a period of 6 years.  He served on continuous active duty until his voluntary discharge on 15 Jul 91.  His highest grade held was staff sergeant.

A resume of applicant’s enlisted performance reports (EPRs) follows:

	      PERIOD CLOSING			OVERALL EVALUATION

			16 Apr 87							9 (APR)
			16 Apr 88							9
			16 Apr 89							9
			31 Mar 90							5 (EPR)
			31 Mar 91							3

On 28 Feb 91, he received an Article 15 for being drunk while on duty.  His punishment consisted of reduction in grade to sergeant, forfeiture of $561 per month for two months and 30 days of correctional custody.  

On 6 Mar 91, his NCO status was vacated due to his not accepting his NCO responsibilities and not providing leadership to his subordinates.  The commander noted that he had developed a negative and belligerent attitude which made him unreliable and ineffective as an NCO.  The applicant did not appeal this decision.  He was reduced to the grade of senior airman with an effective date and date of rank of 28 Feb 91.  

On 12 Apr 91, applicant was permanently withdrawn from weapons bearing authority and permanently decertified from Personnel Reliability Program (PRP) duties.

On 8 May 91, he applied for voluntary separation for miscellaneous reasons.  His request was based on his decertification from PRP, restriction from bearing firearms and the withdrawal of his security forces AFSC.  This prohibited him from performing duties in his guaranteed career field and he did not desire to serve in another field. 

On 15 Jul 91, he was honorably discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-10.  He was credited with 5 years, 2 months, and 29 days of active duty.

The initial DD Form 214 issued in conjunction with the applicant’s 15 Jul 91 separation reflected the narrative reason for separation as “Return from overseas within 30 days of expiration term of service,” with separation code “K14,” and RE Code 4D (Grade is senior airman and member has completed at least nine years of total active service and had not yet been selected for staff sergeant).  The DD Form 214 was administratively corrected and reissued on 27 Aug 91, changing the reason for separation to “Vol-Miscellaneous Reasons,” with separation code “KND,” and RE Code 2H (Participating in Track 4 or 5 of the Substance Abuse Reorientation and Treatment (SART) program for alcohol).

On 8 Sep 94, the Board considered and denied the applicant’s request to change his RE code.

On 25 Jun 03, applicant’s DD Form 214 was administratively corrected to reflect RE code “2Y” in Item 27, rather than “2H.”

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS found that the separation code and narrative reason for separation were correct.  Additionally, they 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 a change in his discharge.  Accordingly, they recommended his records remain the same.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit C.  

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 11 Jul 03 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 error or injustice.  We find no evidence to indicate that the applicant’s voluntary separation from the Air Force was inappropriate or contrary to the governing regulations.  At the time a member is separated from the Air Force, he/she is furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality of his/her service and the circumstances surrounding the separation.  The assigned code reflects the Air Force’s position regarding whether or not, or under what circumstances, the individual should be allowed to reenlist.  Applicant’s RE code of 2Y accurately reflects that he was a career airman whose NCO status had been vacated.  After reviewing the evidence of record, and the documentation submitted in support of the applicant’s appeal, we find no evidence that the assigned RE Code is in error or unjust.  Additionally, we note the applicant has failed to provide any documentation relating to his activities since leaving the service.  In view of the foregoing, 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2003-01211 in Executive Session on 8 October 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 25 Mar 03, w/atch. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 1 May 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Jul 03.