RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBERS:  BC-2002-02890
            INDEX CODE 106.00
            COUNSEL:  None

            HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility (RE)  code  of  “2B”  (Separated  with  a
general or under-other-than-honorable (UOTHC) discharge) be changed to
one that allows enlistment.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The misconduct was more like  youthful  exuberance.  He  realizes  his
mistakes and takes matters more seriously now. He wants to enlist  and
serve his country.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 23 Jul 97  and  was
assigned to Keesler AFB, MS.

On 19 Mar  98,  he  was  notified  of  his  commander’s  intention  to
recommend discharge for minor disciplinary infractions with a  general
characterization.  The notification stated that between 30 Oct 97  and
3 Mar 98 the applicant was either counseled  or  reprimanded  for  the
following reasons:  Sleeping in class twice, driving 10 miles over the
speed zone, leaving his dorm window unlocked, leaving his wall  locker
unsecured, playing  games  with  students  in  supervised  study,  not
shaving in a couple of days, lacking military bearing, not wearing his
belt with his battle dress  uniform,  driving  a  private  vehicle  to
school after lunch, failing his flight line block test,  and  underage
consumption of alcoholic beverage.

On 26 Mar 98, his commander recommended a general discharge for  minor
disciplinary  infractions.  Probation  and  rehabilitation   was   not
recommended based on the applicant’s failure to stay out  of  trouble.
The applicant indicated on 26 Mar 98  that  he  waived  his  right  to
submit statements; however, on that same day he submitted a statement.
 On 31 Mar 98, the case was found legally sufficient based on his many
disciplinary infractions  despite  opportunities  to  correct  himself
after each violation.

On  2  Apr  98,  the  discharge  authority  directed  the  applicant’s
separation.  The applicant was discharged on 2 Apr 98  for  misconduct
with a general characterization.  He was issued an RE  code  of  “2B.”
He served 8 months and 10 days of active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ  AFPC/DPPRS  believes  the  discharge  was  consistent   with   the
procedural and substantive requirements of the  discharge  regulation.
The discharge was within the discretion of  the  discharge  authority.
The applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify  any  errors
or  injustices  that  occurred  in   the   proceedings.    Denial   is
recommended.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

HQ  AFPC/DPPAE  asserts  the  applicant’s  RE  code  of   “2C”   [sic]
(Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge  or  entry  level
separation  without   characterization   of   service)   is   correct.
[Examiner’s Note:  The advisory is incorrect; the  applicant  received
an RE code of “2B.”]

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Complete copies of the Air Force evaluations  were  forwarded  to  the
applicant on 10 Jan 03 for review and comment within 30 days.   As  of
this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

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. After a thorough  review  of  the
evidence  of  record  and  the  applicant’s  submission,  we  are  not
persuaded that his RE code should be upgraded. His RE code was  driven
by his discharge.  His discharge  was  the  result  of  12  documented
infractions in less than 5  months.  The  applicant  has  provided  no
evidence demonstrating the discharge was unjust, excessive or  brought
about by anything other than his own repeated  misconduct  in  a  very
short period of time. We also note he has  submitted  no  post-service
information, such as educational accomplishments, employment  history,
contributions to his community, and character references  from  people
who can vouch for his honesty  and  integrity.  Should  the  applicant
provide information reflecting that he has been a productive member of
his community since his discharge, we would be willing to  review  his
case for possible reconsideration on the basis of clemency. Unless  or
until he does so, however, we conclude that he has not  shown  he  was
the victim of either an error or  injustice  and  find  no  compelling
basis on which to recommend granting the relief sought.

_________________________________________________________________

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  this  application  in
Executive Session on 6 Mar 03 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                             Ms. Cathlynn B. Sparks, Panel Chair
                             Ms. Nancy Wells Drury, Member
                             Mr. Robert H. Altman, Member

The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number 02-
02890 was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 2 Sep 02.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 11 Oct 02.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAE, dated 27 Dec 02.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Jan 03.




                                   CATHLYNN B. SPARKS
                                   Panel Chair