RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2009-02996
            INDEX CODE:  110.00
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NOT INDICATED

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

        1.  His   reenlistment   (RE)   code   of   2B   (Misconduct-Pattern
Discreditable Involvement with Military or Civil Authorities) be changed  to
a waiverable code.

      2.  His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He would like his RE code changed to a code that would allow him  to  enlist
in the military.  He has suffered the consequences  of  his  discharge  over
the past 20-plus years.  He wants to obtain  employment  overseas;  however,
his discharge has hindered his efforts.

He was young and inexperienced when  he  was  assigned  duties  in  Germany;
however, his prior record was good.    He  accepts  responsibility  for  his
actions.  His supervisor and coworkers displayed unprofessional conduct  and
made racial slurs and jokes around him.    He was denied entry in the  Honor
Guard and had to work while others were allowed  to  participate  in  sports
and other off duty activities.  He cannot  prove  how  he  was  treated  but
would like to be given the benefit of the doubt.

In support of his request, the applicant submits a personal statement.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air  Force  on  25  Jul  83.   He  was
progressively promoted to the grade  of  airman  first  class  (A1C)  having
assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 25 Jul 84.

The following is a resume of his performance reports:

Close-Out Date   Overall Rating

24 Jul 84        9
24 Nov 84        8
 4 Jun 85        9
 4 Jun 86        4

On 9 Oct 86, the applicant  was  notified  by  his  commander  that  he  was
recommending his discharge from the Air Force for a pattern  of  misconduct,
under AFR 39-10, Administrative Separation of Airman, paragraph 5-47a,  with
a general (under honorable conditions) discharge.

The commander’s reasons were as follows:

      1)  On  or  about  1  Oct  85,  he  was  cited  for  being  drunk  and
disorderly.  For this offense, he  received  an  Article  15,  reduction  to
airman (suspended), ordered to forfeit $100, and given 14 days extra duty.

      2)  On or about 14 Jan 86 and  21  Feb  86,  he  received  Letters  of
Counseling (LOC) for poor duty performance and the  quantity  of  timeliness
of completing his work.

      4)  On or about 23 Aug 86, he failed to go at the time  prescribed  to
his appointed place of duty and failed to obey a lawful order given  by  his
first sergeant  to  report  to  his  supervisor.   For  these  offenses,  he
received an Article 15, reduction to airman basic and 30 days extra duty.

The  applicant  acknowledged  receipt  of  the   notification   and,   after
consulting military legal counsel, submitted statements in his  own  behalf.
The commander thereafter initiated  a  recommendation  for  the  applicant’s
separation.  The Deputy and Staff Judge Advocates  found  the  case  legally
sufficient.  On 3 Dec 86, the discharge authority approved  the  recommended
discharge.  The applicant was discharged with  a  general  (under  honorable
conditions) discharge for misconduct-pattern discreditable involvement  with
military or civil authorities.  He served 3 years, 4 months and 21  days  on
active duty.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of  Investigation  (FBI)
provided a copy of an Investigative Report, which is at Exhibit C.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted  from
the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letters  prepared  by
the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibits D and E.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial.  DPSOS states the discharge to include  the
characterization  of  service  was  consistent  with  the   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  in  the
discharge  processing.   DPSOS  opines  the  applicant  provided  no   facts
warranting an upgrade to his discharge characterization.

The complete DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit D.

HQ AFPC/DPSOA  recommends  denial.   DPSOA  states  RE  code  2B  accurately
reflects the General discharge received by the applicant.

The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to  the  applicant  on  4
Jun 10, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit F).  In  addition,  a
copy of the FBI report and  a  request  for  post-service  information  were
forwarded to the applicant on 7 Jul 10.  As of this date,  this  office  has
received no response (Exhibits F and G).

_________________________________________________________________

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.   We  took  notice  of  the  applicant’s
complete submission in judging the merits of the  case;  however,  we  agree
with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force  offices  of  primary
responsibility and adopt their rationale as the  basis  for  our  conclusion
the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.   Therefore,
in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we found no 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  BC-2009-02996  in
Executive Session on 18 Aug 10, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Panel Chair
      Member
      Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, not dated, w/atch.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  FBI Report.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSOS, dated 6 Apr 10.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSOA, dated 6 May 10
    Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Jun 10.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 13 Jul 10.




                                   Panel Chair