RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-02589
                                 INDEX CODE:  110.00
      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  NONE

      XXXXXXX    HEARING DESIRED:  NO


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  20 FEB 07


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general (under  honorable  conditions)  discharge  be  changed  to
honorable so that he may reenlist into the Armed Services.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His discharge was improper because his separation was based on  family
reasons--hardship. He never did anything wrong  to  the  military  and
conducted himself in a military manner.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force as an airman basic  on
12 July 2000 for a term of six years.

On 17 January 2001, the commander notified  the  member  that  he  was
being discharge from the Air Force  for  entry-level  performance  and
conduct. Basis for commander’s recommendation:

      (1) On Dec 00, he received  a  Letter  of  Reprimand  for  being
absent, without authority from his unit from on or about 23 Nov 00  to
on or about 26 Nov 00.

      (2) On 22 Nov 00, he received a Letter of Reprimand for  failure
to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty.

      (3) On 21 Nov 00, he received a Letter of Reprimand for engaging
in horseplay with another airman, consisting of the exchange of  blows
to the private areas.

      (4) On 14 Nov 00, he received a Letter of Counseling for failure
to keep his dormority room in inspection order all times.

      (5) On 6 Nov 00, he received a Letter of Reprimand  for  failure
to have his student line badge in his possession.

      (6) On 1 Nov 00, he received a Record of  Individual  Counseling
for having his BDU pants tucked instead of bloused, his  hair  was  on
his ears and his uniform was excessively wrinkled.

      (7) On 27 Oct 00, he received a Record of Individual  Counseling
for failure to go at the time prescribed to  his  appointed  place  of
duty.

      (8) On 26 Oct 00, he received a Record of Individual  Counseling
for failure to maintain proper line badge control.

Applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification for  discharge  and
waived his rights to consult with legal counsel and submit  statements
in his own behalf. The base legal office reviewed the case  and  found
it  legally  sufficient  to  support  an  uncharacterized  entry-level
separation.

On 17 January 2001, based on the notification date of 5  January  2001
the applicant was involuntarily discharged under the provisions of AFI
36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen (entry-level  performance
and conduct)  with  service  uncharacterized  and  a  2C  reenlistment
eligibility (RE) code. As of the notification date, he served 5 months
and 24 days of military service.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of  Investigation,
Washington, D.C., provided an investigative report which  is  attached
at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS  recommended  denial  and  stated   that   based   on   the
documentation on file in the master personnel records,  the  discharge
was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the
discharge regulation.  This discharge was within the discretion of the
discharge  authority.   Applicant  did  not  submit  any  evidence  or
identify any errors or  injustices  that  occurred  in  the  discharge
processing.  He provided no facts warranting a change to his character
of service or his reenlistment eligibility code.

Airmen  are  given  entry-level   separation/uncharacterized   service
characterization when separation is initiated in the  first  180  days
continuous active service.  The Department of Defense (DoD) determined
if a member served less than 180 days continuous  active  service,  it
would be unfair to the member and the service  to  characterize  their
limited service.  Therefore, his uncharacterized character of  service
is correct and in accordance with DoD and Air Force instructions.

AFPC/DPPRS complete evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 9
September 2005, for review and comment within 30  days.   As  of  this
date, this office has received no response.

On 12 October 2005, the Board staff forwarded a copy of the FBI report
to the applicant for review  and  response.   As  of  this  date,  the
applicant has not responded (Exhibit F).

_________________________________________________________________

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. The discharge appears  to  be  in
compliance with the governing regulations and we find no  evidence  to
indicate that his separation from the  Air  Force  was  inappropriate.
Therefore, we agree with the opinion and  recommendation  of  the  Air
Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as  the
basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of
an error or injustice.  In addition, based on his  overall  record  of
service, the contents of the FBI  Report  of  Investigation,  and  the
absence  of  evidence  related  to  his  post-service  activities  and
accomplishments,  we  are  not  persuaded  that  an  upgrade  of   the
characterization of  his  discharge  is  warranted  on  the  basis  of
clemency.

_________________________________________________________________

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-
2005-02589  in  Executive  Session  on  8  November  2005,  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Alan A. Blomgren, Member
                 Ms. Jan Mulligan, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 19 Aug 05, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  FBI Report, dated 15 Sep 05.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 30 Aug 05.
      Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Sep 05.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 12 Oct 05.





                                   KATHLEEN F. GRAHAM
                                   Panel Chair