RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  01-00170
            INDEX CODE:  112.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The reasons the applicant believes the  records  to  be  in  error  or
unjust and the evidence submitted in support  of  the  appeal  are  at
Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from  the
applicant's military records, are contained in the letter prepared  by
the appropriate office of the Air Force.   Accordingly,  there  is  no
need to recite these facts in this Record of Proceedings.

On 18 November 1996, the Air Force  Discharge  Review  Board  (AFDRB),
denied applicant’s request for an upgrade of and change of reason  for
his discharge.  They concluded that the discharge was consistent  with
the  procedural  and  substantive  requirements   of   the   discharge
regulation and was within the discretion of  the  discharge  authority
and that the applicant was provided full administrative  due  process.
There exists no legal or equitable basis  for  upgrade  of  discharge,
thus the applicant’s discharge should not be changed (Exhibit B).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Military Personnel Management Specialist, Separations  Branch,  HQ
AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed this application and states that based  upon  the
documentation in the file, they believe the discharge  was  consistent
with the procedural and  substantive  requirements  of  the  discharge
regulation.   Additionally,  the  discharge  was  within   the   sound
discretion of the discharge authority.  The applicant did  not  submit
any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in
the discharge processing.  He provided no facts warranting a change in
his narrative reason for separation or  a  change  in  his  separation
code.  His  narrative  reason  for  separation  “misconduct”  and  his
separation code “JKN” are in accordance with Department of Defense and
Air Force Instructions.  Accordingly, they recommend  the  applicant’s
records remain the same and his request be denied.  He has not filed a
timely request.

A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

The  Special  Programs  and  AFBCMR  Manager,  Directorate,  Personnel
Program Management, HQ  AFPC/DPPAES,  reviewed  this  application  and
states that the RE code “2B,” separated with a general or under  other
than  honorable  conditions  (UOTHC)  discharge,  is   correct.    The
applicant was discharged from service on 13 July 1995 with a character
of service recorded as general (under honorable conditions).

A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed the  Air  Force  evaluations  and  states  that
during his time in the service he did not take life serious enough  to
know that he was ruining a chance to make an impact  for  his  future.
He knows the fault lies with him.  Some people mature quickly, but  he
was a later bloomer.  He states that his  mind,  maturity  level,  and
habits have taken a turn for the better.  His drinking problem was his
worst habit.  He admits that he was an alcoholic; however, now  he  no
longer drinks alcohol.  He would like a chance to show that  he  is  a
valuable asset for the military.  He knows how important it is to have
disciplined personnel in times of crisis and he knows that life is not
a game.  In June 1995 he was informed of the discharge  recommendation
taken  against  him.   His  counsel  suggested  that  he   fight   the
recommendation, but he  was  convinced  that  he  was  not  ready  for
military life at that time.  He accepted the discharge with the intent
to reenter when he felt he was mentally ready for  the  military.   He
was not informed that  reentry  was  not  an  option  until  after  he
accepted the discharge.

Applicant’s complete response 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 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 probable error or injustice.  We took notice  of  the
applicant's complete submission in judging the  merits  of  the  case;
however, a  majority  of  the  Board  agrees  with  the  opinions  and
recommendations of the Air Force and adopts  their  rationale  as  the
basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of
an error or injustice.  The RE and separation codes issued at the time
of separation were in  accordance  with  the  applicable  regulations.
Separation Program Designator (SPD) code “JKN” was the proper code  to
identify the applicant’s misconduct, paragraph 5.49 of the  applicable
Air Force Instruction.  The majority  of  the  Board  noted  that  the
applicant’s  misconduct  was  the  result   of   “minor   disciplinary
infractions.”  The RE code “2B” is used for members separated  with  a
general (under honorable  conditions)  discharge.   A  review  of  the
applicant’s overall duty performance while on active duty would appear
to substantiate the reason he was issued an RE code of “2B” and a  SPD
code of “JKN.”  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary,
a majority of  the  Board  finds  no  compelling  basis  to  recommend
granting the relief sought in this application.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

A majority of the  panel  finds  insufficient  evidence  of  error  or
injustice and recommends the application be denied.
_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the  Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 8 May 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

            Mr. Teddy L. Houston, Panel Chair
            Mr. Edward H. Parker, Member
            Mr. John L. Robuck, Member

By a majority vote, the Board recommended denial of  the  application.
Mr. Teddy L. Houston voted to grant, but he does not wish to submit  a
Minority Report.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, 5 Jan 01, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.



      Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 9 Feb 01.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAES, dated 22 Feb 01.
      Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 16 Mar 01.
      Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated 4 Apr 01.





               TEDDY L. HOUSTON
               Panel Chair




AFBCMR 01-00170





MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD
                 FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS (AFBCMR)

SUBJECT:  AFBCMR Application of

      I have carefully reviewed the evidence of record and the
recommendation of the Board members.  A majority found that applicant
had not provided sufficient evidence of error or injustice and
recommended the case be denied.  I concur with that finding and their
conclusion that relief is not warranted.  Accordingly, I accept their
recommendation that the application be denied.

      Please advise the applicant accordingly.




                                        JOE G. LINEBERGER
                                        Director
                                        Air Force Review Boards Agency