RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2002-03479
            INDEX CODE:  100.03, 100.06
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed and any  negative  remarks
be removed from his records.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Because of back pains he was not allowed to train in the security field  and
was assigned to  the  administrative  field.   While  awaiting  training  he
learned what his schooling consisted of and felt that he had  been  deceived
by personnel at Lackland AFB.  He voiced his dissatisfaction and was put  in
an adjustment class for two weeks.  While in an awaiting status he  received
permission from his lieutenant to go to New Orleans for the weekend.   While
there he was in a car with a few friends after having a  few  drinks.   They
were throwing beer bottles out of the car window into  a  trash  can  and  a
bottle went through a hotel window.   He  and  a  female  that  was  sitting
beside him argued over which one of them threw the bottle that went  through
the window.  When the police arrived they took her word that  he  threw  the
bottle and arrested him.  He spent three days in jail, even though  he  said
that he was willing to pay for the window.  His lieutenant came and got  him
on the fourth day.  After  his  return  to  the  base,  he  was  in  the  BX
purchasing CDs from a clearance rack.  He noticed that some of the  CDs  had
a 50% off price tag on them and others did not.   He  did  not  want  to  go
through the hassle at the registers over the price so he put  50%  off  tags
on the CDs that weren't marked.  He was apprehended by  store  security  and
accused of stealing.  At this point he was utterly disgusted  with  the  Air
Force.  His lieutenant told him that if he wanted  out  of  the  Air  Force,
this would be his best opportunity.  He wrote a letter to the base  exchange
and the hotel and apologized.  The hotel did not press charges  and  he  did
not have to go to court.  He never caused  trouble  with  anyone  and  drank
only  once.   He  was  complemented  on  various  occasions   on   his   job
performance.  He believes he was dealt a bad hand and wants  to  prove  that
he is a responsible and worthy citizen.

In support of his  request,  applicant  provided  a  personal  statement,  a
criminal background check, character references, and his DD Form  214.   His
complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 24 Mar  99.   On  23 Aug  99,
applicant was notified by his commander that he was recommending that he  be
discharged from the Air Force in accordance with  AFPD  36-32  and  AFI  36-
3208, paragraph 5.22.2, Entry Level Performance and Conduct.   The  specific
reason for this action was on 29 Jul 99, he received nonjudicial  punishment
for stealing property of the Army Air Force Exchange  Services;  on  10  Jul
99, he was arrested by  the  New  Orleans  Police  Department  for  criminal
damage to property; and on 3 Aug 99, he received a Letter of Counseling  for
losing his military bearing.  He was advised of his rights  in  this  matter
and acknowledged receipt of the notification on that same date.   He  waived
his right to consult counsel and elected not to  submit  statements  on  his
own behalf.  On 23 Aug  99,  the  discharge  authority  concurred  with  the
recommendation and directed that he be discharged  with  an  uncharacterized
entry-level separation.  On 26 Aug 99, he was discharged and issued RE  code
2C "Involuntarily separated with an  honorable  discharge;  or  entry  level
separation without characterization of service".

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS  recommends  denial.   DPPRS  states  that  the   discharge   was
consistent  with  the  procedural  and  substantive  requirements   of   the
discharge  regulation  and  was  within  the  discretion  of  the  discharge
authority.  The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPAE recommends denial.  DPPAE states that  the  applicant's  RE  code
"2C" is correct.  The DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the  applicant  on  29
Aug 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  careful  consideration  of  the
applicant's request  and  the  available  evidence  of  record,  we  see  no
evidence of an error or injustice that would warrant  a  change  in  his  RE
code.  In our opinion,  given  the  number  of  the  offenses  he  committed
against the good order and discipline of the service in the short period  of
time in which he served, the RE code that he was assigned was proper and  in
compliance with the appropriate directives.  In  addition,  the  reason  for
his separation appears to be accurate and in accordance with the  applicable
directives.  Therefore, we agree with the  opinions  and  recommendation  of
the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and  adopt  their  rationale
as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been  the  victim
of an error or injustice.  In the absence  of  persuasive  evidence  to  the
contrary, we are not compelled to recommend favorable consideration  of  his
request.

_________________________________________________________________

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-2002-
03479 in Executive Session on 1 Oct 03, under  the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

      Mr. Frederick R. Beaman III, Panel Chair
      Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Member
      Mr. Michael J. Maglio, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 21 Nov 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 7 Jul 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 13 Aug 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Aug 03.



                                   FREDERICK R. BEAMAN III
                                   Panel Chair