RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: 01-01991
            INDEX CODE 100.06
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The narrative reasons for his separation be  changed  and  his  Reenlistment
Eligibility (RE) code be upgraded to allow his entry into the United  States
Army.

_________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The applicant states that he  is  currently  serving  in  the  Georgia  Army
National Guard (NG) and desires to  participate  full-time  in  the  Regular
Army.

Since he entered the National Guard, he has obtained  the  rank  of  private
first class (E-3) and a Military Occupational Series (MOS) of 19-D  (Bradley
Scout).  However, his RE  code  and  narrative  reason  for  separation  are
preventing him from entering the Regular Army.   The  main  reason  for  his
discharge was his failure  to  qualify  in  his  military  specialty  (i.e.,
munitions).  An RE code of “2B” is inappropriate because he did not  receive
a dishonorable discharge.  In addition, he was told that  six  months  after
his discharge, he would be able to join any of the  other  branches  of  the
armed forces - just not the Air Force.

Applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 30 November 1994, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force  for  a
period of four years at the age of 18.

On  25  July  1995,  the  commander  notified  the  applicant  that  he  was
recommending him for  discharge  for  unsatisfactory  duty  performance  and
minor disciplinary  infractions.   Specifically,  the  commander  cited  the
following:

      a.    On or about 15 June 1995, the applicant failed to report to  his
appointed place of duty and received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR).

      b.    On or about 10  June  1995,  the  applicant  violated  a  lawful
general regulation by  wearing  civilian  clothing  while  in  phase  I  and
received an LOR.

      c.    On or about 26 May  1995,  the  applicant  failed  to  obey  the
instructions of his instructor and received an LOR.

      d.    On or about 30 April 1995 and 6 May 1995, the  applicant  failed
to report to  his  appointed  placed  of  duty  and  received  a  Record  of
Individual Counseling.

On 1 August 1995, he was discharged under  the  provisions  of  AFI  36-3208
(Misconduct) with his service characterized as  under  honorable  conditions
(general).  He completed eight months and two days of active  service,  with
five months and six days of prior inactive service.  He  was  issued  an  RE
code of “2B.”

On 4 November 1996, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB)  considered
and denied applicant’s request that his discharge be upgraded  to  honorable
and the reason for his discharge be changed.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The  Assistant  Noncommissioned  Officer  in  Charge   (NCOIC),   Separation
Procedures Section, AFPC/DPPRS, states that  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 injustice that occurred in the discharge  processing.
Therefore, they recommend denial of his request.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

The Assistant Chief,  Skills  Management  Branch,  AFPC/DPPAE,  states  that
applicant’s RE code of “2B” (Separated with a general  or  under-other-than-
honorable-conditions (UOTHC) discharge” is correct.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and states that he  was  not
considered for discharge until he failed his Block X exam.  As to the  minor
disciplinary infractions, he provides an explanation  for  each.   He  notes
that it was his first time away from home and  he  had  never  been  in  the
military before.  As such,  he  was  afraid  of  making  someone  angry  and
possibly getting a dishonorable discharge.  When he would  get  “written-up”
he would just sign it and tell them no comment so he  would  not  get  worse
punishment.  He is now 25 years old and is mature, dependable,  and  a  hard
worker.   His  First  Sergeant  and  Commander  support  his  request.    In
addition, an Army recruiter has advised him that if he can get his  RE  code
changed, he would be able to enter the regular Army with no problem.

The applicant’s complete response is attached 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.    Sufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of probable injustice to warrant changing the applicant’s RE  code
to “3K.” In this respect, we note that since  his  discharge  from  the  Air
Force, the applicant has entered the National  Guard  and  appears  to  have
overcome the  behavorial  traits  which  led  to  the  contested  discharge.
However, his assigned RE code of “2B” is preventing him  from  entering  the
United States Army.  In view of this, and in order to provide the  applicant
the opportunity to apply for entry into the Army, we  believe  his  RE  code
should be changed in the interest of equity and justice.  Whether or not  he
is  successful  will  depend  on  the  needs  of   the   service   and   our
recommendation in no way guarantees that he will be  allowed  to  return  to
any branch of the service.  Therefore, we recommend his RE code  be  changed
to “3K.”

4.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to  demonstrate  the
existence of probable error or injustice to warrant changing  the  narrative
reason for the applicant’s discharge.  We took  notice  of  the  applicant's
complete submission in judging the merits of his request; however, since  he
failed to make satisfactory progess in a required training program,  we  are
not persuaded that the narrative reason for his discharge  is  in  error  or
unjust.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we  find  no
compelling basis upon which to  recommend  favorable  consideration  of  his
request to change the narrative reason for the applicant’s discharge.

_________________________________________________________________


THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air  Force  relating
to APPLICANT be corrected to show that at the time of  his  discharge  on  1
August 1995, he was issued a Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of “3K.”

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in  Executive
Session on 16 October 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                  Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
                  Ms. Olga M. Crerar, Member
                  Mr. Richard M. McCormick, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 22 Jun 01, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 17 Aug 01.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 28 Aug 01.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 31 Aug 01.
      Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated 20 Sep 01.




                                   RICHARD A. PETERSON
                                   Panel Chair

AFBCMR 01-01991




MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

      Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force
Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section
1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that:

      The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that at the time of his
discharge on 1 August 1995, he was issued a Reenlistment Eligibility (RE)
code of “3K.”








JOE G. LINEBERGER

Director

Air Force Review Boards Agency