7RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02214

	 	COUNSEL:  NONE

	 	HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His discharge be upgraded to honorable, his separation code be changed, and his Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed to allow his reenlistment into the armed forces.

_________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His discharge should not have occurred since the Letters of Reprimand (LORs) he received during his enlistment lacked creditability.

In support of the appeal, the applicant submits a copy of a statement from a former acting supervisor.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant contracted his enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 19 May 2000.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of airman first class.

On 11 April 2002, he received notification that he was being recommended for discharge for misconduct, specifically, a pattern of misconduct prejudicial to good order and discipline (i.e., failed to attend scheduled appointments, extremely disrespectful to an Army Noncommissioned Officer (NCO), assaulted his spouse, disrespectful to a Senior NCO when he muttered an obscenity in his presence, violated a directed order to remain in temporary lodging for 10 days, arrested by --- County Police for an altercation with a civilian, and failed to complete Volume 2 of his Career Development Course (CDC), as evidenced by 6 Letters of Reprimand (LORs) and 3 Letters of Individual Counseling (LOCs).  He received a general discharge on 29 April 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Misconduct).  He had completed a total of 1 year, 11 months and 11 days of active service and was serving in the grade of airman first class (E-3) at the time of discharge.  He received an RE Code of “2B”, which defined means "Separated with a general or under other than honorable conditions."

On 22 May 2003, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied his request that his discharge be upgraded to honorable and his RE Code and reason and authority for discharge be changed.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and within the discretion of the discharge authority.  The applicant has provided no facts warranting an upgrade of his discharge.

The AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPAE states, in part, that the RE code of “2B” assigned to the applicant is correct.  The applicant was discharged due to his history of substandard behavior.

The AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

He will always have a mark against him as long as his records remain unchanged.  He is currently employed with the Texas Department of Criminal Justice and will not be able to obtain a better job unless his discharge is upgraded.  He learned a lot while in the Air Force and since his discharge, things have been a lot harder for he and his family.

The applicant’s complete response, with attachment, is at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations.

2.  The application was timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.  After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and noting the applicant’s complete submission, we find no evidence of error or injustice.  In this respect, we note that the applicant’s discharge appears to be in compliance with the governing Air Force Instruction in effect at the time of his separation and he was afforded all the rights to which entitled.  He has provided no evidence to indicate that his separation was inappropriate. There being insufficient evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought.

4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

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 Docket Number BC-2003-02214 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 Jun 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 14 Jul 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 13 Aug 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 Aug 03.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated 21 Sep 03, w/atch.