RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-01297
            INDEX CODE:  100.00

      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: NO


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  27 OCT 2008


___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility code of  2B  (involuntarily  separated
with a general or under  other  than  honorable  condition  (UOTHC)
discharge) be changed to a code which will enable him to enlist  in
the United States Army.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He does not feel the minor infractions he committed should keep him
from enlisting in the Army, if they are willing to  take  him.   He
was young and made some mistakes, however, he still would  like  to
serve his country.

In support of  his  appeal,  applicant  submitted  a  copy  of  his
DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active  Duty,
dated 29 Aug 86.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 1 Dec 83, applicant enlisted in the  Regular  Air  Force  for  a
period of six years.  He was progressively promoted to the rank  of
senior airman with a date of rank of 20 May 86.

On  18   Aug   86,   applicant’s   squadron   commander   initiated
administrative discharge action against the applicant for a Pattern
of Misconduct.  The specific reasons for the proposed action were:

On or about (o/a) 1 Aug 84 to o/a 31  Dec  84,  applicant  used  an
aerosol spray can and a match as a  torch  device  in  a  dormitory
hallway.  For this misconduct, he received an Article 15.

O/a 17 Apr 85, applicant was  drunk  and  disorderly  at  the  non-
commissioned officer (NCO) club.  For this offense, he  received  a
Letter of Reprimand.

On 9 Nov 85, applicant  was  involved  in  a  verbal  and  physical
dispute with another flight member.  For this offense, he  received
a letter of counseling.

On 11 Jul 86, applicant was insubordinate toward  a  superior  NCO.
For this offense, he received a letter of reprimand.

On 31 Jul 86, applicant failed to obey a lawful  order.   For  this
misconduct, he received a letter of reprimand and a UIF entry.

On  that  same  date,  applicant  acknowledged   receipt   of   the
notification and after consulting with counsel, waived  his  rights
to submit statements in his own behalf.

On 26 Aug 86, the staff judge advocate found the case to be legally
sufficient  to  support  discharge  action  and   recommended   the
applicant be given  a  general  discharge,  without  probation  and
rehabilitation.  On 27 Aug 86, the discharge authority approved the
separation and directed he be  discharged  with  a  general  (under
honorable conditions) discharge.  Probation and Rehabilitation were
considered, but found not suitable.

On 29 Aug 86, applicant was  discharged  under  the  provisions  of
AFR 39-10, Administrative Separation of Airmen, with  a  reason  of
misconduct  -  pattern  of  minor  disciplinary  infractions,  with
service characterized as general (under honorable conditions).   He
was credited with 2 years, 8 months and  29  days  of  active  duty
service during this period.

On 23  Feb  89,  the  Air  Force  Discharge  Review  Board  (AFDRB)
considered and denied the applicant’s request to have  his  general
discharge upgraded  to  honorable  and  recommended  he  contact  a
recruiter to determine if a waiver  would  be  considered.   If  he
believes his RE code is in error, to submit a DD Form 149,  to  the
AFBCMR.  However, they did find based upon the record,  applicant’s
testimony, evidence provided by the applicant, that his reason  for
discharge was inequitable and directed his reason for separation be
changed  to   “Misconduct   –   Pattern   of   Minor   Disciplinary
Infractions.”   They  further  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 (see AFDRB Hearing Record at Exhibit B).

Pursuant  to  the  Board’s   request,   the   Federal   Bureau   of
Investigation, Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided an investigative
report which is attached at Exhibit C.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial. Based on the documentation on file
in the master personnel records, the discharge was consistent  with
procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation
and was within the discretion  of  the  discharge  authority.   The
applicant did not submit any evidence or  identify  any  errors  or
injustices that occurred during the discharge process.  He provided
no facts warranting a change to his character  of  service  or  his
reenlistment eligibility code.

HQ AFPC/DPPRS’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to  the  applicant
on 11 May 07 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.  Insufficient  relevant   evidence   has   been   presented   to
demonstrate the existence of an error  or  injustice.   Applicant’s
contentions are duly noted; however, we are not persuaded  that  he
has been the victim of an error or injustice.  At the time  members
are separated from the Air Force, they are  furnished  an  RE  code
predicated upon the quality of their service and the  circumstances
of their separation.  Applicant’s RE code of 2C accurately reflects
that he was involuntarily separated with a general (under honorable
conditions) characterization of service and given the circumstances
surrounding his separation, we believe the RE code  issued  was  in
accordance with  the  governing  regulations.   Therefore,  in  the
absence  of  persuasive  evidence  to  the  contrary,  we  find  no
compelling basis to recommend granting the relief  sought  in  this
application.

___________________________________________________________________

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-2007-01297 in Executive Session on 11 September 2007, under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Wayne R. Gracie, Panel Chair
      Ms. Josephine L. Davis, Member
      Mr. Elwood C. Lewis III, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 18 Apr 07, w/atch.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  FBI Report of Investigation.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 3 May 07.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 May 07.




                                   WAYNE R. GRACIE
                                   Panel Chair