RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-00825
            INDEX CODE:  100.00, 110.02

      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  NONE

      XXXXXXX    HEARING DESIRED: NO


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  19 SEP 2007


___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His separation and reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was told by an Air Force Reserve unit that he  may  have  errors
with  his  separation  codes.   He  never  received  any  documents
explaining why he didn’t receive an identification card  (ID  Card)
at separation.  He was never in  a  substance  abuse  program.   He
would like to know if his codes are correct.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Based on the available records, applicant enlisted in  the  Regular
Air Force on 13 Nov 81 for a period of four years.  On 24  May  89,
his commander nonrecommended him for reenlistment.  On 18  Sep  89,
applicant’s commander vacated  his  Noncommissioned  Officer  (NCO)
Status due to being arrested for driving under the influence  (DUI)
on base, with an effective date and date of rank of 18 Sep 89 as  a
senior airman.

On 30 Jan 90, he was honorably discharged under the  provisions  of
AFR 39-10 and with a reason  for  separation  as  Early  Separation
Program – Strength Reduction.  He was  issued  an  RE  code  of  2H
(Participating in Track 4 or 5 of the Substance Abuse Reorientation
and Treatment (SART) Program for alcohol,  or  failed  to  complete
Track 4).  He was credited with 8 years, 2 months, and 18  days  of
active duty service.

___________________________________________________________________



AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPAE reviewed  this  application  and  recommended  denial
stating in part, a review of  the  applicant’s  military  personnel
records revealed that on 19 May  89,  an  AF  Form  418,  Selective
Reenlistment/Noncommissioned  Officer  Status   Consideration   was
initiated by his supervisor nonrecommending  him  for  reenlistment
based on several written reprimands and verbal  counseling’s  about
his off-duty performance and his inconsistent technical ability and
knowledge.  On 24 May 89, applicant’s commander concurred with  the
recommendation and cited additional factors.  The  applicant  opted
not to appeal the decision and his RE code was updated to 2X (first-
term, second term or career airman considered but not selected  for
reenlistment under the Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP)).

On 18 Sep 89, an additional AF Form 418 was initiated  recommending
his NCO status be vacated based on a 3 Sep 89 arrest for a DUI.  He
appealed  the  decision  and  his  RE  code  was  changed   to   2H
(participating in Track 4 or 5 of the Substance Abuse Reorientation
and Treatment (SART) Program for alcohol,  or  failed  to  complete
Track 4).

DPPAE found no evidence or injustice that the applicant’s  RE  code
was incorrect or should be changed.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommended applicant’s request be denied.  Based  on
documentation in the file, they found the discharge consistent with
the  procedural  and  substantive  requirements  of  the  discharge
regulation.  Additionally, the discharge was within the  discretion
of the discharge authority.  They  also  noted  applicant  did  not
submit any evidence or facts warranting a change to his  separation
code or reenlistment eligibility code.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant
on 5 May 06 for review and comment within  30  days.   As  of  this
date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit E).

___________________________________________________________________

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.  After a thorough review of the available  evidence  of  record,
applicant’s  discharge  appears  to  be  in  compliance  with   the
governing regulation and we find no evidence to indicate  that  his
discharge was inappropriate or that the stated reason for discharge
and corresponding separation code are in error or unjust.   At  the
time a member is separated from the Air Force, they  are  furnished
an RE Code predicated upon the quality of  their  service  and  the
circumstances of their separation.  The assigned code reflects  the
Air Force’s position  regarding  whether  or  not,  or  under  what
circumstances, the individual should be allowed to reenlist.  After
careful  consideration  of  the  evidence  provided,  we  are   not
persuaded that the RE code of 2H is in error or unjust or  that  an
upgrade of the RE code is warranted.  We therefore conclude that no
basis exists upon  which  to  recommend  favorable  action  on  his
request that it be changed.

___________________________________________________________________

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-2006-00825 in Executive  Session  on  6  June  2006,  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. James W. Russell III, Panel Chair
      Ms. Janet I. Hassan, Member
      Mr. Elwood C. Lewis III, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 Mar 06.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAE, dated 11 Apr 06, w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 19 Apr 06.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 May 06.




                                   JAMES W. RUSSELL III
                                   Panel Chair