RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-01799
      INDEX CODE:  110.02

      COUNSEL:  NONE

      HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE:  10 OCTOBER 2006

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed to “3K” (waiverable).
________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was discharged because of his academic scores and not his performance  or
conduct.  He would like to reenlist and serve his country.   In  support  of
his/her  application,  the  applicant   submits   his   personal   statement
(unsigned) and a copy of his separation document.

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 28 April 1999, the applicant enlisted in the Regular  Air  Force  at  the
age of 19 in the grade of Airman Basic  (E-1)  for  a  period  of  four  (4)
years.  He completed Basic Military Training School in June  1999,  and  was
assigned as a Communications Computer Systems Operations Helper.

On 1 September 1999, he received two verbal counseling’s  and  a  Letter  of
Counseling (LOC) for not having  three  Enrolled  Discrepancy  Report  forms
(AETC Form 341), for failure to complete an appointment slip or  notify  any
Military Training Leader of his appointment, and for  failure  to  go  to  a
mandatory formation.

On 14 September 1999, he received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) and a LOC  for
abandoning his detail  while  on  AFI  status  and  for  showing  disrespect
towards a student leader.  On 15 September  1999,  he  received  a  LOR  for
failure to report to a mandatory AFI briefing.  On  17  September  1999,  he
received an LOC and verbal counseling for creating a security  violation  by
leaving his dormitory room unlocked and missing  curfew.   On  18  September
1999, his  room  was  found  in  violation  of  the  phase  program  and  he
reportedly failed to meet curfew.  For these offenses, he was issued an  LOR
on 20 September 1999.

On 20 September 1999, he received an LOR for  failure  to  secure  his  wall
locker.  On 21  September  1999,  he  was  verbally  counseled  because  his
dormitory room was not in inspection order.  On 24 September  1999,  he  was
verbally counseled because he missed curfew.

On 4 October 1999, he was issued an LOR for wearing civilian  clothes  while
in Phase I, not carrying three (3) AETC Form 341’s,  two  (2)  incidents  of
missed curfew, and failure to  report  to  a  Military  Training  Leader  as
ordered during the period of 27 September through 3 October 1999.

On 6 October 1999, he was verbally counseled  for  not  carrying  three  (3)
AETC Form 341’s, failure to have his dormitory  room  in  inspection  order,
and wearing a hat indoors.

On 20 October 1999, the applicant’s commander notified  the  applicant  that
he was recommending the applicant be separated from the Air Force under  the
provisions of AFPD 26-32 and AFI 36-3208, Chapter 5, Section  D,  for  Entry
Level Performance or Conduct.  The applicant  was  advised  of  his  rights.
The  applicant  acknowledged  receipt  of  the   notification   and,   after
consulting military legal counsel, submitted a statement in his own  behalf.
 The commander thereafter initiated a  recommendation  for  the  applicant’s
separation.

On 26 October 1999, a paralegal assigned  to  the  staff  of  the  discharge
authority reviewed the discharge package  for  further  processing.   On  26
October 1999, the discharge authority approved  the  recommended  separation
and directed the applicant be discharged for the reasons recommended by  his
commander, without the offer of probation and rehabilitation.

On 28  October  1999,  the  applicant  was  separated  with  an  entry-level
separation because of Entry Level Performance and Conduct.   He  had  served
six months and one day on active  duty.   A  reenlistment  eligibility  (RE)
code of 2C (Involuntarily separated with an entry level  separation  without
characterization of service) was assigned.

A National Guard Bureau Report of Separation  and  Record  of  Service  (NGB
Form 22) indicates that subsequent to his discharge  from  the  Regular  Air
Force, the applicant enlisted in the Air National Guard on 25 Jul  2000  and
was  discharged  under  honorable  conditions  because   of   unsatisfactory
participation in the grade of E-1 on 22 April 2002.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ  AFPC/DPPRS  recommends  denial.   DPPRS  states  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, and the discharge was within  the  discretion  of  the
discharge   authority.    DPPRS   notes   airmen   are   given   entry-level
separation/uncharacterized  service  characterization  when  separation   is
initiated  in  the  first  180  days  of  continuous  active  service.   The
Department of Defense determined if a member served less than  180  days  of
continuous active service it would be unfair to the member and  the  service
to  characterize  their  limited  service.   DPPRS  opines  the  applicant’s
uncharacterized character of service is correct and in accordance  with  DoD
and Air Force instructions.  DPPRS concludes the applicant  did  not  submit
any evidence or identify any errors  or  injustices  that  occurred  in  the
discharge processing, and did not provide any facts warranting a  change  to
his reenlistment eligibility code.  DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

In a personal statement dated 25 July 2005,  the  applicant  reiterates  his
reasons for wanting to enter active duty service.  He also  submits  support
letters from his recruiter, his fiancé, and his mother (Exhibit E).
________________________________________________________________

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 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.   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 probable material error or injustice; that the  application
was denied without a personal appearance;  and  that  the  application  will
only be reconsidered upon the submission

________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2005-01799
in Executive Session in Executive Session on 31 January 2006, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:


      Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
      Mr. Charlie E. Williams Jr., Member
      Mr. Vance E. Lineberger, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 5 May 05, with attachments.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 5 Jul 05.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Jul 05.
      Exhibit E.  Applicant’s Letter, dated 25 Jul 05, w/atchs.





      CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
      Panel Chair