RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-03481
		INDEX CODE:  110.02

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED: NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2C (involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service) be changed to a code which will enable him to reenlist in another military branch; his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be corrected to reflect an oak leaf cluster (sic) for the Small Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon (SAEMR) in Item 13 and that he completed the Air Base Ground Defense course in Mar 93.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Applicant did not present any contentions.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 20 Aug 91, in the grade of airman basic (AB/E-1) for a period of four years.  Prior to the events under review, he was promoted to the grade of airman first class (A1C/E-3).  He received two enlisted performance reports with overall promotion recommendations of 3.

On or about 7 Jun 92, while posted as a Gate #2 Sentry, applicant wrote several rude remarks as well as made several drawings depicting certain parts of the anatomy and a swastika, for which he received a letter of reprimand.

On or about 1 Apr 93, applicant was derelict in the performance of his duties by failing to maintain his dormitory room in accordance with local base regulations, for which he received a letter of reprimand.

On or about 9 Apr 93, applicant was derelict in the performance of his duties by willfully failing to maintain his dormitory room, for which he received an Article 15.  The Article 15 punishment imposed on him consisted of a suspended reduction to the grade of airman and 45 days of extra duty.

On or about 8 Sep 93, he received an Article 15 for failure to go at the prescribed time to his appointed place of duty.  His punishment consisted of vacation of his suspended reduction to the grade of airman with a new effective date and date of rank of 20 Apr 93.

On 15 Oct 93, the squadron section commander initiated administrative discharge action against the applicant for misconduct, specifically, minor disciplinary infractions as evidenced by the incidents cited above.  On that same date, applicant acknowledged receipt of the discharge notification.

On 15 Oct 93, after consulting with counsel, applicant submitted statements in his own behalf, requested to be retained or if discharged, that he would like to receive an honorable discharge.  On 20 Oct 93, the staff judge advocate found the case to be legally sufficient to support discharge and recommended a general discharge without probation and rehabilitation (P&R).

On 25 Oct 93, the discharge authority approved a general (under honorable conditions) discharge, without P&R.

On 1 Nov 93, applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-10, with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions), and was issued Reenlistment Eligibility code 2B (involuntarily separated under the provisions of AFR 39-10 with a general discharge).  He was credited with 2 years, 2 months, and 12 days of active duty service.

Applicant was awarded the National Defense Service Medal, Air Force Overseas Long Tour Ribbon, Small Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon, and the Air Force Training Ribbon.

On 26 Aug 03, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and granted the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge to honorable and to change his reason for discharge to Secretarial Authority.  Based on the upgrade of the characterization of his discharge, the applicant’s RE code was administratively changed to 2C (involuntarily separated under AFR 39-10 with an honorable discharge).

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPPR reviewed this application and recommended denial.  On 20 Nov 03, applicant was asked to clarify his request, as to which award should be corrected to show he was entitled to an oak leaf cluster.  Applicant explained he qualified as Expert during basic training and again in technical training school.

He was further advised that the SAEMR has a bronze service star, not an oak leaf cluster, for subsequent award.  Applicant has not provided any documentation to substantiate his claim that he qualified as Expert with both the M-16 and his unit’s handgun of issue.

A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

HQ AFPC/DPPAT recommended denial of the applicant’s request for credit for the Air Force Ground Defense-Level II course on his DD Form 214.  On 13 Nov 03, they requested the applicant provide a training certificate for completion of the course, but he has not responded.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D.

HQ AFPC/DPPRS reviewed this application and recommended denial.  They found the discharge 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 a change to his RE code.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit E.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 2 Apr 04 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit F).

___________________________________________________________________

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 warranting a change to the applicant’s RE code.  We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices 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.  Applicant’s assigned RE code of 2C accurately reflects his involuntary separation with an honorable discharge.  Based on the foregoing, and in the absence of evidence that the assigned RE code is in error or contrary to the governing regulation, we find no basis upon which to recommend favorable consideration of his request.

4.  Regarding the applicant’s requests for award of Small Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon, with bronze service star, and that his record be corrected to reflect he completed the Air Base Ground Defense-Level II course in March 1993, HQ AFPC/DPPPR requested he provide supporting documentation.  However, he did not respond.  Should the applicant provide documentation to substantiate his claim, we would be willing to reconsider his petition.  In view of the above, we find no basis to recommend granting his requests.

___________________________________________________________________

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-2003-03481 in Executive Session on 1 June 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 9 Oct 03, w/atchs. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPR, dated 4 Mar 04, w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAT, dated 25 Mar 04.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 31 Mar 04.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 2 Apr 04.