RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01490
            INDEX CODE:  100.03, 100.06
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be upgraded.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He is a true American and would  like  nothing  more  that  to  restore  his
respect and regain honor from his country, family and friends.  He asks  for
upgrade to serve his country in its undying efforts  to  rid  the  world  of
terrorism and tyranny  against  the  United  States  and  its  allies.   His
experience and skills can help our younger troops get through  these  trying
times and overcome any obstacles that stand before  them.   He  was  once  a
promising young sergeant of 7 years in the Air Force  and  2  years  in  the
Army Reserve.  Since his  discharge  he  has  kept  his  life  together  and
excelled as a person, family man, and patriot.  He has devoted his time  and
efforts to youth organizations, earned his Bachelor's degree in  Psychology,
Criminal Justice, and a minor in Communications.  He is in  the  process  of
forming a youth organization in St. Louis.  It would be a  great  honor  for
him to again devote his  services  to  the  United  States  and  his  fellow
comrades in protecting his country.  He promises to continue in his  pursuit
in being an outstanding citizen and family man and give his undying  loyalty
and support to the President of the United States.

In  support  of  his  request,  applicant  provided  his  bachelor's  degree
certificate, a Certificate of  Award,  personal  references,  his  Honorable
Discharge  certificates,  and  a  Certificate  of  Training.   His  complete
submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant, a prior service enlistee, contracted his most  recent  enlistment
in the Regular Air Force on 20  Nov  85  in  the  grade  of  senior  airman.
Applicant was tried by  general  court-martial  for  two  specifications  of
wrongfully distributing marijuana.  He plead guilty and was found guilty  of
both specifications.  His sentence, adjudged on 28 Jul 88,  was  confinement
for 11 months, reduction to the grade of E-1, and a  bad  conduct  discharge
(BCD).  However, only so much of the sentence that provided  for  10  months
confinement, reduction to the  grade  of  E-1,  and  BCD  was  approved  and
executed.  His case  was  reviewed  and  the  findings  of  guilty  and  the
adjudged sentence were confirmed by the Air Force Court of  Military  Review
on 21 Oct 88.  The U.S. Court of Military Appeals denied his  appeal  on  21
Feb 89.  Applicant was discharged on 11 May  89.   He  served  6  years,  11
months, and 8 days on active duty.  He was assigned RE code  of  "2M"  which
denotes "Serving a sentence  or  suspended  sentence  of  court-martial;  or
separated while serving a sentence or suspended sentence of court-martial".

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFLSA/JAJM recommends denial.  JAJM states that there is no legal basis  for
upgrading his RE code.  The appropriateness of  the  sentence  is  a  matter
within the discretion of the court-martial  and  may  be  mitigated  by  the
convening authority or within the course of appellate review.   He  had  the
assistance of counsel and was afforded all rights  granted  by  statute  and
regulation.  He provides no compelling rationale to  mitigate  the  approved
BCD given the circumstances of the  case.   While  clemency  is  an  option,
there is no reason to grant clemency in this case.  He  did  not  serve  his
enlistment honorably.  The JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPAE recommends denial.  DPPAE states  that  his  RE  code  of  2M  is
correct.  The DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the  applicant  on  29
Aug 03 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this  office
has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

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.   After  careful  consideration  of  the
applicant's request  and  the  available  evidence  of  record,  we  see  no
evidence of an error or injustice that would warrant  a  change  in  his  RE
code.  In  our  opinion,  given  the  serious  nature  of  the  offenses  he
committed against  the  good  order  and  discipline  of  the  service,  the
decision to discharge him from the Air Force and the RE  code  that  he  was
assigned, were proper and in compliance  with  the  appropriate  directives.
While we find his post-service accomplishments and  his  desire  to  further
serve his country commendable, we do not find  his  assertions  sufficiently
persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air Force.   Therefore,
we agree with the opinions and recommendation of the Air  Force  offices  of
primary responsibility and adopt  their  rationale  as  the  basis  for  our
conclusion that he has not been the victim of an  error  or  injustice.   In
the absence of persuasive evidence to the contrary, we are not compelled  to
recommend favorable consideration of his request.

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 AFBCMR Docket Number  BC-2003-
01490 in Executive Session on 1 Oct 03, under  the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

      Mr. Frederick R. Beaman III, Panel Chair
      Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Member
      Mr. Michael J. Maglio, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 9 Apr 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFLSA/JAJM, dated 23 Jun 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 13 Aug 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Aug 03.




                                   FREDERICK R. BEAMAN III
                                   Panel Chair