SECOND ADDENDUM TO
                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER: 98-00510
                                        INDEX CODE 106.00 100.06
    XXXXXXXXX                           COUNSEL:  None

    XXXXXXXXX                           HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

RESUME OF CASE:

On  January  19,  1999,  the  Board  considered  and  again   denied
applicant’s request for an honorable discharge with a  corresponding
RE code.  An FBI report obtained for that reconsideration  indicated
no arrest record could be located based on the data provided.

A copy of the Addendum to Record of Proceedings (ROP) is provided at
Exhibit I.

The applicant has provided  additional  post-service  materials  and
again requests reconsideration.

Applicant's complete reconsideration request is attached at Exhibit J.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

Sufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of probable error or injustice.  We find no  impropriety  in
the characterization of applicant's discharge.  It  appears  that  the
responsible officials applied appropriate standards in  effecting  the
separation, and we do not  find  persuasive  evidence  that  pertinent
regulations were violated or that applicant was not afforded  all  the
rights to which entitled at the time of discharge.  Considered  alone,
we conclude the discharge proceedings were proper and characterization
of the discharge was appropriate to the existing circumstances.

Consideration of this Board, however, is not  limited  to  the  events
which precipitated the discharge.  We  have  a  Congressional  mandate
which  permits  consideration  of  other  factors;  e.g.,  applicant's
background,  the  overall  quality  of   service,   and   post-service
activities and accomplishments.  Further, we may base our decision  on
matters of equity and clemency rather than simply on whether rules and
regulations that existed at the time were followed.  This  is  a  much
broader consideration than officials involved in  the  discharge  were
permitted, and our decision in  no  way  discredits  the  validity  of
theirs.

Under our broader mandate and after careful consideration of  all  the
facts and circumstances of applicant's case, the majority of the Board
is persuaded the applicant has been a productive  member  of  society.
We recognize the adverse impact of the discharge  applicant  received;
and while it may have been appropriate at the time, the Board majority
believes it would be an injustice for applicant to continue to  suffer
its effects.  Accordingly,  the  majority  of  the  Board  finds  that
corrective action is appropriate as a matter  of  equity  and  on  the
basis of clemency.   Therefore,  the  Board  majority  recommends  his
discharge be upgraded to honorable and his RE  code  be  changed  from
“2B” to the waiverable RE code of “3A” as he requests. The “3A”  would
permit him to apply for  enlistment  and,  should  he  have  desirable
skills and is otherwise acceptable, the Reserves may  elect  to  waive
his ineligibility and  allow  him  to  enlist.  The  applicant  should
understand that this RE code change in no way  obligates  any  of  the
Services to accept him for enlistment.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the  Department  of  the  Air  Force
relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that, on 3 February  1982,
he was honorably  discharged  and  furnished  an  Honorable  Discharge
certificate, and that the  reenlistment  eligibility  code  issued  in
conjunction with his discharge was “3A,” rather than “2B.”

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the  Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 7 January 2000, under the provisions of  AFI  36-
2603:

                  Mrs. Barbara A. Westgate, Panel Chair
                  Ms. Patricia D. Vestal, Member
                  Ms. Olga M. Crerar, Member

The  majority  of  the  Board  voted  to  correct  the   records,   as
recommended. Ms. Vestal recommended the application be denied but does
not wish to  submit  a  Minority  Report.  The  following  documentary
evidence was considered:

   Exhibit I.  Addendum to ROP, dated 16 Apr 99, w/atchs.
   Exhibit J.  Applicant's Letter, dated 12 Nov 99, w/atchs.




                                   BARBARA A. WESTGATE
                                   Panel Chair

                                 ADDENDUM TO
                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER: 98-00510


    XXXXXXXXX                COUNSEL:  None


    XXXXXXXXX                     HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

RESUME OF CASE:

In an application dated 17 February 1998, the applicant requested that
his reenlistment (RE) code of “2B” be changed  to  a  waiverable  code
such as “3A.” The applicant had been discharged in 1982 after 2 years,
1 month and  1  day  of  active  duty  for  “Unsuitability  -  Apathy,
Defective  Attitude.”  He  received  a  general  characterization   of
service.

On 25  August  1998,  the  Board  considered  and  denied  applicant's
request, concluding the applicant had supplied  insufficient  evidence
to warrant changing the code. The cover letter forwarding the  Board’s
decision advised the applicant that the type of discharge he  received
drove the RE code and suggested he  provide  post-service  information
for possible reconsideration.

Complete copies of the cover letter and the Record of Proceedings  are
attached at Exhibit F.

In letters dated  22  October  and  3  December  1998,  the  applicant
provided additional documentation and asked for an upgraded  discharge
with a corresponding RE code.

Applicant's complete reconsideration request is attached at Exhibit G.

Pursuant  to  the  AFBCMR  Staff’s  request,  the  Federal  Bureau  of
Investigation  (FBI)  indicated  that,  on  the  basis  of  the   data
furnished, they  were  unable  to  locate  an  arrest  record  on  the
applicant (Exhibit H).
_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

After again reviewing the evidence of record, we find  no  impropriety
in the characterization of  the  applicant's  service.  The  discharge
appears  consistent  with  procedural  requirements  and  within   the
discharge authority’s discretion. Responsible officials appear to have
applied  appropriate  standards  in  effecting  the  separation.   The
applicant  has  not  provided  persuasive  evidence   that   pertinent
regulations were violated or that he was not afforded all  the  rights
to which entitled at the time  of  discharge.  We  find  no  error  or
injustice regarding his general discharge  and,  since  the  discharge
drove the applicant’s RE code, the “2B” he received is  valid.  It  is
true that this Board is not limited to  considering  only  the  events
which precipitated the discharge.  We  have  a  Congressional  mandate
which permits consideration of other  factors;  e.g.,  an  applicant's
background, overall quality of service,  and  post-service  activities
and accomplishments. Further, we may base our decision on  matters  of
equity  and  clemency  rather  than  simply  on  whether   rules   and
regulations which existed at the time were  followed.  However,  after
carefully considering the post-service documentation submitted by  the
applicant, we do not feel compelled to grant the requested  relief  on
the basis of clemency.  The additional documentation provided does not
overcome the fact that, according  to  the  evidence  of  record,  the
applicant’s  military  performance  and  behavior   were   good   when
conditions suited him but less  than  honorable  when  they  did  not.
Accordingly,  we  are  not  persuaded  that   corrective   action   is
appropriate.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of probable  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  this  application  in
Executive Session on 19 January 1999, under the provisions of AFI  36-
2603:

                  Mrs. Barbara A. Westgate, Panel Chair
                  Ms. Olga M. Crerar, Member
                  Ms. Patricia D. Vestal, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit F.  AFBCMR Letter dated 3 Sep 98, w/atchs.
   Exhibit G.  Applicant's Letters, dated 22 Oct & 3 Dec 98.
   Exhibit H.  FBI Response.




                                   BARBARA A. WESTGATE
                                   Panel Chair

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:                 DOCKET NO: 98-00510

      XXXXXXXXX              COUNSEL: None

      XXXXXXXXX              HEARING DESIRED: No


Applicant requests that his  reenlistment  eligibility  (RE)  code  be
changed  from  “2B”  (Separated  w/General  or  Other  than  Honorable
Discharge) to a waiverable  code  such  as  “3A”  (First  Term  Airman
Separated Before Completing 36-60 Months on Current Enlistment  &  Who
Has No Known  Disqualifying  Factors  Except  Grade  &  Skill  Level).
Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A.

The appropriate  Air Force office evaluated  applicant's  request  and
provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application
be denied (Exhibit C).  The advisory  opinion  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant for review and response (Exhibit D).   Applicant's  response
to the advisory opinion is at Exhibit E.

We note that, after a personal hearing, the Air Force Discharge Review
Board  (AFDRB)  considered  and  denied  applicant’s  request  for  an
upgraded discharge and RE code on 25 September  1984.   After  careful
consideration of applicant's request and  the  available  evidence  of
record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant
corrective action.  The facts and  opinions  stated  in  the  advisory
opinion and the brief prepared by the AFDRB appear to be based on  the
evidence  of  record  and  have  not  been  sufficiently  rebutted  by
applicant. The RE code applicant received was driven by his discharge,
and  there  is  insufficient  evidence  to   warrant   upgrading   the
discharge’s characterization. Absent persuasive evidence applicant was
denied rights to which  entitled,  appropriate  regulations  were  not
followed, or appropriate standards were not applied, we find no  basis
to disturb the existing record.

Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.

The Board staff is directed to  inform  applicant  of  this  decision.
Applicant should also be informed that this decision is final and will
only be reconsidered upon the presentation of  new  relevant  evidence
which was not reasonably available at the  time  the  application  was
filed.

Members of the Board Mrs. Barbara A. Westgate, Ms. Olga M. Crerar, and
Ms. Patricia D. Vestal considered this application on
25 August  1998  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  Air  Force
Instruction 36-2603, and the governing statute, 10, U.S.C. 1552.




                                       Panel Chair

Exhibits:

A.  Applicant's DD Form 149
B.  Available Master Personnel Records
C.  Advisory Opinion
D.  AFBCMR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion
E.  Applicant's Response