RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-00841
            INDEX CODE:  100.06, 110.00

            COUNSEL:  xxxxxxxxxx
            HEARING DESIRED:  NOT INDICATED

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed to a code that will  allow
reentry into the military.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The injustice and abuse from his leadership, as well as  discrimination,  is
the cause of his RE code.

In support of his request, applicant provided a DD Form 215,  Correction  to
DD Form 214, Certificate of Release  or  Discharge  From  Active  Duty,  and
various documents from his AFDRB case file and his discharge file.

The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 14 Dec 04, for  a  period
of four years in the grade of airman first class.

On 16 Jan 07, the squadron commander notified  the  applicant  that  he  was
recommending he be discharged  from  the  Air  Force  for  misconduct.   The
commander  recommended  a  general  discharge   based   on   the   following
disciplinary actions:  1) Three no-contact orders issued on him  on  12  Sep
and 7 Nov 05, and on 23 Oct 06, respectively; 2) a Letter of  Counseling  on
7 Nov 05, for insubordinate conduct and inappropriate language  towards  two
females; 3) Three Letters of Reprimand for  disorderly  conduct,  harassment
of two female co-workers, and for inappropriate, persistent,  and  unwelcome
advances towards a female airman; and 4) an Article 15 on  29  Nov  06,  for
harassment of a married woman.  Punishment imposed was  reduction  in  grade
to airman basic, and restriction to the base for 30 days.

Applicant acknowledged receipt  of  the  discharge  notification  and  after
consulting with legal counsel submitted statements in his own behalf.

The Wing Staff Judge Advocate found the case  file  legally  sufficient  and
recommended he be separated with a general discharge without  probation  and
rehabilitation.   On  29  Jan  07,  the  discharge  authority  approved  the
separation  and  directed  the  applicant  be  discharged  with  a   general
discharge without probation and rehabilitation.

On 2 Feb 07, applicant was discharged in the grade of  airman  basic,  under
the provisions of  AFI  36-3208,  by  reason  of  misconduct,  with  service
characterized as under honorable conditions (general) and was issued  an  RE
Code of 2B (involuntarily separated with a general discharge).  He served  2
years, 1 month, and 19 days of active military service.

On 5 Mar 07, applicant applied to the  Air  Force  Discharge  Review  Board
(AFDRB) requesting his discharge be upgraded to honorable, that his  reason
for discharge be changed, and that his RE  code  be  upgraded.   The  AFDRB
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.   However,  based  upon  the  evidence  of
record and his testimony the Board concluded that the  overall  quality  of
applicant’s service would be more accurately reflected  as  Honorable,  and
the reason  for  the  discharge  would  be  more  accurately  described  as
Secretarial  Authority.   The  Board  acknowledged  the  applicant’s   high
motivation to re-enter military  service;  however,  the  Board  denied  an
upgrade of his RE code.

Applicant was issued a corrected DD Form  214,  Certificate  of  Release  or
Discharge from Active Duty reflecting an honorable discharge and an RE  code
of 2C [involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge].

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial.  DPSOA found no evidence  of  an  error  or
injustice in this case.  DPSOA stated that his RE code should be changed  to
“2C” to reflect the honorable discharge directed by the AFDRB.  As noted  in
the statement of facts his RE code  has  been  administratively  changed  to
“2C.”

The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 9 Apr 08, a copy of  the  Air  Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant’s counsel for review and comment  within  30  days.   To  date,  a
response has not been received.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or
regulations.

2.  The application was timely filed.

3. Insufficient relevant evidence has  been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of an error or injustice.  The applicant’s  contentions  are  duly
noted; however, we do not find these uncorroborated assertions,  in  and  of
themselves, sufficiently persuasive to override the  rationale  provided  by
the Air Force office of primary responsibility.  Therefore,  we  agree  with
the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force and adopt its  rationale  as
the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the  victim  of
an error  or  an  injustice.   We  note  that  his  DD  Form  214  has  been
administratively corrected to reflect an RE code of  2C.   We  further  note
that an RE code of 2C, while barring him  from  reenlistment  with  the  Air
Force, may be waived by another branch of military service.   Therefore,  in
view of the above findings and in the absence of 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  Docket  Number     BC-2008-
00841 in Executive Session on 29 May 08, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

      Mr. Wayne R. Gracie, Panel Chair
      Mr. Vance E. Lineberger, Member
      Mr. Garry G. Sauner, Member

The following documentary evidence  pertaining  to  Docket  Number  BC-2008-
00841 was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 25 Feb 08, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 17 Mar 08.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Apr 08.




                                             WAYNE R. GRACIE
                                             Panel Chair