RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-01000
            INDEX CODE:  100.03

      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  NONE

      XXXXXXX    HEARING DESIRED: NO


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  25 SEP 2006


___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code  of  2B  (Separated  with  a
general or under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge)
be corrected to allow him continuation of service.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The biggest injustice was of his  own  doing.   He  would  like  an
opportunity to repay the very ones he let down.

He is not the same person  now  that  he  was  then.   He  has  the
capability and desire to be a good serviceman  and  is  willing  to
make whatever sacrifices necessary to be a part of our Armed Forces
again.

In support of his appeal,  applicant  submitted  a  letter  from  a
family member, dated 31 Jan 05, and a  letter  from  his  employer,
dated 17 Mar 05.

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

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force  on  6  Mar  01  for  a
period of four years.

On  12  Dec  01,   the   squadron   section   commander   initiated
administrative  discharge  action   against   the   applicant   for
misconduct,  specifically,  minor  disciplinary  infractions.   The
reasons for the proposed action were:

      On or about 26 May 01, applicant violated  Second  Air  Force
Phase program  restrictions  without  an  approved  itinerary,  and
accompanied airmen who drank alcohol while under the legal  age  to
do so.  For these actions, he received a Letter of Reprimand  (LOR)
on 4 Jun 01, was placed back in Phase I, Day I, scheduled for  RMT,
CQ, and other duties as  deemed  appropriate,  and  an  Unfavorable
Information File (UIF) was established.

      On 13 Sep 01, he failed to have mandatory items  at  physical
conditioning  (PC),  for  which  he  received  an  AETC  Form   341
(Excellence/Discrepancy Report).

      On 1 Oct 01, he received an LOR for violating the  2400  hour
building curfew on 30 Sep 01, and driving a vehicle while over  the
legal alcohol limit for operating a motor vehicle.

      Between 4 and 21 Oct 01, he received four AETC Forms 341  for
repeatedly being late for details in  the  morning,  violating  the
Second Air Force Phase program  by  failing  his  room  inspection,
using profanity  toward  CQ,  and  failing  the  open  wall  locker
inspection during RMT.

      On 22 Oct 01, applicant received a letter of  counseling  for
failing to do CQ inventory.

      On 20 Nov 01, he received an LOR and  was  placed  back  into
Phase I of the Second Air Force Phase program for  being  late  for
two mandatory formations on 13 and 14 Nov 01.

      On 26 Nov 01, applicant received  an  Article  15  for  being
derelict in the performance of his duties  by  failing  to  refrain
from drinking alcoholic beverages while in Phase I  of  the  Second
Air Force Phase program, failing to refrain from  wearing  civilian
clothing and from departing the boundaries of the base in violation
of the Second Air Force Phase program, and with intent to  deceive,
signing an official document, which  was  totally  false,  and  was
known by applicant to be false.  The punishment  imposed  consisted
of reduction to the grade of airman basic, with  an  effective  and
date of rank of 26 Nov 01.

On  that  same  date,  acknowledged  receipt   of   the   discharge
notification  and,  after  consulting   with   counsel,   submitted
statements in his own behalf.  He wrote a  statement  to  both  the
squadron and group commander talking about how  alcohol  influenced
his actions.  On 3 Jan 02, the  Chief,  Adverse  Actions  concurred
with the finding that the case was legally  sufficient  to  support
discharge and recommended a general discharge without probation and
rehabilitation  (P&R).   On  4  Jan  02,  the  discharge  authority
approved a general discharge, without P&R.


On 9 Jan 02, applicant  was  discharged  under  the  provisions  of
AFI 36-3208, with service characterized as general, and was  issued
RE code 2B.  He was credited with 10 months and 4  days  of  active
duty service.

On 31 Oct 02, the applicant submitted an  application  to  the  Air
Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) requesting his under honorable
conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to honorable.  The AFDRB
denied his request on the grounds that no legal or equitable  basis
existed for upgrade of discharge. (Exhibit B)

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS reviewed  the  application  and  recommended  denial.
Based on the documentation in the file, they  found  the  discharge
consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of  the
discharge regulation.  Additionally, the discharge was  within  the
sound discretion of  the  discharge  authority.   They  also  noted
applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or
injustices that occurred in the discharge processing  and  provided
no other facts warranting a change to the RE code.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to  the  applicant
on 8 Apr 05 for review and comment within  30  days.   As  of  this
date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D).

___________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided  by  existing
law or regulations.

2.  The application was timely filed.

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  he
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 the  circumstances
of their separation.  Applicant’s RE code of 2B accurately reflects
his  involuntary  separation  with  a  general   (under   honorable
conditions) discharge.  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 governing directives.  In the absence of persuasive evidence to
the contrary, we find no compelling 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 Docket  Number
BC-2005-01000 in Executive  Session  on  18  May  2005,  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Panel Chair
      Mr. Wallace F. Beard Jr., Member
      Ms. Rita S. Looney, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 17 Mar 05, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 1 Apr 05.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Apr 05.




                                   KATHLEEN F. GRAHAM
                                   Panel Chair