RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-03678
                       INDEX CODE:  110.00
                       COUNSEL:  NONE

                       HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed from a “2B” to an RE
code that would allow him to reenter the military service.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

At the time of his discharge, he was 20 years old and did not  realize
the benefits of being in the military.  He is now  31  years  old  and
realizes the mistake he made.

Applicant's complete submission,  with  attachments,  is  attached  at
Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on  3  July  1990,  as  an
airman basic (AB) for a period of four years.

On 5 February 1992, the applicant  was  notified  of  his  commander’s
intent  to  recommend  him  for  discharge  for   Minor   Disciplinary
Infractions.  The commander recommended  a  general  (under  honorable
conditions) discharge.  The reasons for the discharge action were:

      a.  On 11 October 1990, the  applicant  failed  three  times  to
properly clean a command car.  For  this,  he  received  a  Record  of
Counseling (ROC), dated 11 October 1990.

      b.  On  17  October  1990,  the  applicant  failed  to  meet  an
appointment with the Commander.  For this, the applicant  received  an
ROC, dated 18 October 1990.

      c.  On 30 November 1990, the applicant was stopped  by  Security
Police where they found his .22  caliber  rifle  which  had  not  been
registered on base.  For this misconduct,  the  applicant  received  a
Letter of Reprimand (LOR), dated 6 December 1990.

      d.  The applicant on 5 December  1990,  reported  late  for  his
dental appointment causing the appointment  to  be  rescheduled.   For
this, he received an ROC, dated 12 December 1990.

      e.  On 4 August 1991, while not of legal drinking age,  consumed
alcoholic beverages and drove a motor vehicle.  For  this  misconduct,
the applicant received an LOR, dated 15 August 1991.

      f.  On 7 August 1991, the applicant  failed  to  report  to  the
track area for his aerobics run.  For this, he received an ROC  dated,
7 August 1991.

      g.  On 11 September 1991, the applicant was caught  driving  101
miles per hour (MPH) in a  45  MPH  zone.   For  this  misconduct,  he
received an LOR, dated 23 October 1991, an ROC, dated 16 October 1991,
and his Government Drivers License was revoked.

      h.  On 1 October 1991, the applicant failed to report to duty on
time.  For this misconduct, he received an LOR, dated 1 October 1991.

      i.  On 19 January 1992, the applicant was one hour late for  his
Reading Test.  For this, he received an LOR, dated 27 January 1992.

      j.  On or between 25-26 January 1992, the  applicant  failed  to
report to duty on time.  For  this,  misconduct  he  received  an  ROC
dated, 28 January 1992.

The commander advised  applicant  of  his  right  to  consult  legal
counsel and that military legal counsel had been obtained  for  him;
and to submit statements in his  own  behalf;  or  waive  the  above
rights after consulting with counsel.

On 10 February 1992, the applicant after  consulting  with  counsel,
waived his right to submit statements on his behalf.

The commander indicated in his recommendation for discharge that the
applicant was repeatedly  counseled  and  issued  several  forms  of
administrative actions in  an  effort  to  bring  his  (applicant’s)
behavior in  compliance  to  Air  Force  standards.   The  commander
further recommended the applicant be  discharged  without  probation
and rehabilitation.

A legal review was conducted on 11 February 1992 in  which  the  staff
judge advocate recommended the applicant be discharged with a  general
discharge with no probation and rehabilitation.

On 11 February 1992, the discharge authority approved the discharge.

Applicant was discharged on 14 February 1992, in the grade  of  airman
with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge,  in  accordance
with  AFR  39-10  (Misconduct  -   Pattern   of   Minor   Disciplinary
Infractions).  He served a total of 1 year, 7 months and  12  days  of
active service.  He received an RE code of “2B”  which  indicates  the
applicant was involuntarily separated with a general  or  under  other
than honorable conditions discharge.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS states the applicant has not  submitted  any  evidence  nor
identified any errors or injustices that occurred in the processing of
his discharge.  Based upon the documentation in the applicant's  file,
they believe his discharge was  consistent  with  the  procedural  and
substantive requirements of  the  discharge  regulations.   Also,  the
discharge was within the sound discretion of the discharge  authority.
Therefore, based  on  the  information  and  evidence  provided,  they
recommend the applicant's request be denied.

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

EXAMINER’S NOTE:  Applicant does not contest the accuracy  of  the  RE
code and after reviewing the  applicable  regulation,  AFR  39-10,  it
appears the RE code is correct.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 5
December 2003, for review and response.  As of this date, no  response
has been received by this office.

_________________________________________________________________

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 waive the failure to timely file.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to  demonstrate
the existence of an error or injustice.  Applicant’s contentions  are
duly noted; however, we are not persuaded that the applicant has been
the victim of an  error  or  injustice.   At  the  time  members  are
separated  from  the  Air  Force,  they  are  furnished  an  RE  code
predicated upon the quality of their  service  and  circumstances  of
their separation.  After a thorough review of the evidence of record,
we believe that given the circumstances surrounding  the  applicant’s
separation, the RE code issued was in accordance with the appropriate
directives.  Furthermore, the applicant has not provided any evidence
to substantiate the processing of his discharge or  the  RE  code  he
received was in error or unjust.  Therefore, we find  no  basis  upon
which to recommend favorable action on 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-2003-
03678 in Executive Session on 10 February 2004, under the  provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

                       Mr. Roscoe Hinton, Jr., Panel Chair
                       Ms. Sharon B. Seymour, Member
                       Mr. Garry G. Sauner, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 9 Nov 03 w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRSP, dated 20 Nov 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRB, dated 5 Dec 03.




                                   ROSCOE HINTON, JR.
                                   Panel Chair