RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-03186
		INDEX CODE:  100.06

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of “2B” be changed.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His RE code is unjust.  He does not believe that he was given the benefit of the doubt that he could change for the better.  He has matured since his discharge and no longer feels that the code is appropriate.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provided an expanded statement.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 2 Aug 95 for a period of four years in the grade airman basic.

On 15 Mar 96, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was recommending that the applicant be discharged for minor disciplinary infractions.  The reasons for this action were:  On 31 Oct 95, he received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for failure to follow orders on 30 Oct 95; on 9 Nov 95, he received an LOR for harassing a female student on 6 Oct 95; on 13 Nov 95, he received an LOR for failure to report to a mandatory formation on 9 Nov 95; on 5 Dec 95, he received an Article 15 for malingering on 27 Nov 95; on 7 Dec 95, he received an LOR for conducting himself in a manner inconsistent with good order and discipline on 23 and 24 Nov 95; on 8 Dec 95, he failed a room inspection and received an AETC Form 341; on 12 Dec 95, he received a Letter of Counseling (LOC) for a phase violation; on 26 Jan 96, he received an LOC for failing a room inspection and having a security violation; on 27 Feb 96, he received an LOR for a phase violation on 3 Feb 96; on 15 Feb 96, he failed a room inspection and received an AETC Form 341; on 11 Mar 96, he received an LOR for not being at his place of duty as the Charge of Quarters on 5 Mar 96; and, on 14 Mar 96, he received an LOR for entering two females’ room while on duty as the Charge of Quarters.  The applicant was advised of his rights in the matter and that a general discharge would be recommended.

In a legal review of the discharge case file, dated 20 Mar 96, the office of the Staff Judge Advocate found the file was legally sufficient and recommended that the applicant be discharged with a general discharge.  

On 26 Mar 96, the discharge authority approved the discharge action and directed that the applicant be furnished a general discharge.

On 27 Mar 96, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Misconduct) and furnished a general discharge.  He was assigned an RE code of 2B (Separated with a general or under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge).  The applicant was credited with 7 months, and 26 days of active service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRSP recommended denial indicating that based on the documentation in the file, they believe the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation, and was within the sound discretion of the discharge authority.  According to AFPC/DPPRSP, the applicant did not submit any new evidence nor did he identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.  He also provided no facts warranting a change in his discharge.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPRSP evaluation is at Exhibit C.

EXAMINER'S NOTE: An Air Force evaluation pertaining to the RE code was not received; however, prior to forwarding the case to the Board the Air Force determined that the RE code assigned is correct.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 31 Oct 03 for review and response.  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 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.  We note that the Secretary of the Air Force has statutory authority to promulgate rules and regulations governing the administration of the Air Force.  In the exercise of that authority, the Secretary has determined that members separated from the Air Force would be furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality of their service and circumstances of their separation.  The evidence of record reflects that the applicant was involuntarily separated from the Air Force because of misconduct.  As a result, he was given a general discharge and assigned an RE code of 2B (separated with a general or UOTHC discharge).  Therefore, the applicant’s RE code apparently was appropriately assigned and accurately reflected the circumstances of his separation, and, we find no evidence to indicate that the assigned RE code was in error.  In view of the foregoing, and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we conclude that no basis exists to recommend favorable action on the applicant’s request that his RE code of 2B be changed.

_________________________________________________________________

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-2003-03186 in Executive Session on 2 Dec 03, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number BC-2003-03186 was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 20 Sep 03, w/atch.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRSP, dated 17 Oct 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 31 Oct 03.