RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  99-03149
                             INDEX CODE: 110.00

      xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx     COUNSEL: NONE

        xxxxxxxxxxx    HEARING DESIRED:  YES


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His separation code and Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He entered the Air Force at the age of 17.   He  was  considerably  immature
and  lacked  self-discipline.   Within  days  he  realized  that  he  wasn’t
psychologically prepared to meet the  challenges  and  demands  of  the  Air
Force.  Since his discharge, he has worked  to  be  within  four  months  of
receiving a baccalaureate degree in mathematics.  He states that he  regrets
causing distractions in the progress of the overall Air Force  mission.   He
has greatly matured socially, spiritually, and psychologically.

In support  of  his  request,  he  submits  a  personal  statement,  college
transcript, and character references.

Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 17 April 1996  in  the  grade
of airman basic for a period of 4 years.

On 23  April  1996,  the  commander  indicated  in  his  recommendation  for
discharge that this action was recommended because the applicant had  failed
to adapt to  the  military  environment,  he  failed  to  make  satisfactory
progress in a required training program, his reluctance to make  the  effort
necessary to meet Air Force standards of conduct and duty  performance,  his
lack of self-discipline, and he received a minor disciplinary  infraction  -
Letter of Reprimand (LOR) dated 19 April 1996.

The commander advised applicant of his right to consult  legal  counsel,  to
submit statements in his  own  behalf;  or  waive  the  above  rights  after
consulting with counsel.

On 23 April 1996, applicant waived his  right  to  consult  counsel  and  to
submit statements in his own behalf.

On 24 April 1996, the discharge authority approved  the  recommendation  for
discharge and directed that he be given an entry-level separation.

Applicant was discharged on 29 April 1996, in  the  grade  of  airman  basic
with a uncharacterized  discharge,  under  the  provisions  of  AFI  36-3208
(Entry-Level Performance and Conduct).  He served a total of 13 days  active
duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Military Personnel  Management,  Specialist,  Directorate  of  Personnel
Program Management, AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed this application  and  states  that
based upon the documentation in the file, they  believe  the  discharge  was
consistent  with  the  procedural  and  substantive  requirements   of   the
discharge regulation.  The discharge was within the sound discretion of  the
discharge authority.  The applicant did  not  submit  any  new  evidence  or
identify  any  errors  or  injustices  that  occurred   in   the   discharge
processing.  He provided no facts  warranting  a  change  in  his  narrative
reason for separation or a change  in  his  separation  code.   Accordingly,
they recommend denial of applicant's request.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

The Military  Personnel  Management  Specialist,  Directorate  of  Personnel
Program Management, AFPC/DPPAES, also reviewed this application  and  states
that the Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code “2C” is correct.   The  type  of
separation drove assignment of the RE code.

A complete copy of their Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed the advisory opinions and states  that  it  has  been
four years since his discharge, and it was less than  six  months  from  his
discharge that he discovered an error and injustice.  He has  become  within
days of receiving a college degree and  considers  this  a  major  life-long
accomplishment.  He states had it not been for his pursuit,  he  would  have
discovered and presented this argument  much  sooner.   He  hopes  that  the
Board can find merit in the time lapse and give fair  consideration  to  his
case.  The military has become his  most  desired  pursuit  post-graduating.
He asks the Board to approach  his  case  bearing  clemency  in  mind.   The
commander’s reasons for initiating separation  encompasses  issues  such  as
exiting his military uniform, and returning  in  his  civilian  attire.   He
also refused to train with three independent  requests  to  do  so,  by  the
assigned drill instructors.  This all occurred within hours after his  first
day of basic military training.  He feels remorse  for  what  has  happened,
however, this is his  attempt  to  reveal  his  lack  of  ambition  for  the
military at that time.  He enlisted at the age of 17 by the condemnation  of
his mother  and  grandmother  and  was  unprepared  for  the  service.   The
separation and discharge codes given, prohibits him from reenlisting in  the
Air Force or any other branch of service.  If the Air Force feels that  they
do not want to take another chance with him, he should at least, be able  to
enter another branch of service.  His mind has broaden and he is  a  changed
person.  He has proven not only to others, but himself that  he  is  a  very
goal-oriented individual with outstanding drive and potential.

Applicant's complete response is attached at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

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  probable  error  or  injustice.   We  took  notice   of   the
applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case;  however,
we agree with the opinion and recommendation of  the  Air  Force  and  adopt
their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant  has  not
been the victim of an error or injustice.   Therefore,  in  the  absence  of
evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend  granting
the relief sought in this application.

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 issue(s) 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 probable 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 this application in  Executive
Session on 20 June 2000, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                  Mr. Terry A. Yonkers, Panel Chair
                  Mr. John E. Pettit, Member
                  Mr. William H. Anderson, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 6 January 2000, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 8 March 2000.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAES, dated 23 March 2000.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 14 April 2000.
   Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated 24 April 2000, w/atchs.




                                TERRY A. YONKERS
                                Panel Chair