RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-03254
            INDEX CODE:  100.03, 100.06

      xxxxxxxxxxxx     COUNSEL:  NONE

      xxxxxxxxxxxx     HEARING DESIRED: NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  28 APR 2007

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His (RE) code be changed to allow him  to  join  the  Air  National
Guard.
___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

When he enlisted into the Air Force he was assured by his recruiter
he would be trained into the security forces career;  however  upon
completion of basic training he was told that his  specialty  would
be heating, ventilation, and air  conditioning.   He  has  matured,
completed extensive training in law enforcement and would  like  to
serve his country.

In support of his  request,  the  applicant  submitted  a  personal
statement, a copy of his DD Form 214,  Certificate  of  Release  or
Discharge from Active Duty, and DD Form 293,  Application  for  the
Review of Discharge or Dismissal  from  the  Armed  Forces  of  the
United States.

His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular  Air  Force  on  20  February
1997, in the grade of airman basic.

On 9 June 1997, his commander notified him that he was recommending
he be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFI 36-
3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen (entry-level  performance
and conduct).  The specific reason for his action was the applicant
failed his Block 1 and Block 2 tests with unsatisfactory scores  of
60% and 40%; passing score is 70.  He also  received  a  Letter  of
Reprimand (LOR) on 19 May 1997, for failure to show up for CQ  duty
and for returning to his dormitory after his assigned  curfew;  and
on 24 April 1997, he received  a  LOR  for  violating  AETC  policy
against tobacco use in uniform.

The applicant was advised of his rights in the matter.  On  9  June
1997, he acknowledged receipt of the notification, waived his right
to consult counsel, and elected not to submit statements on his own
behalf.

The case was reviewed on 16 June 1997,  and  found  to  be  legally
sufficient to support discharge.  He was  separated  from  the  Air
Force  on  18  June  1997,  with  an  uncharacterized   entry-level
separation, and received an RE code of 2C ”Involuntarily  separated
with an honorable discharge;  or  entry  level  separation  without
characterization of service.”  He served 3 months and  29  days  on
active duty.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  DPPRS states  that  based  upon  the
documentation in the file, the discharge was  consistent  with  the
procedural  and   substantive   requirements   of   the   discharge
regulation.  Additionally, the discharge was within the  discretion
of the discharge authority.

The applicant did not submit  any  new  evidence  or  identify  any
errors or injustices that occurred in the  discharge  process;  nor
did he provide any facts warranting a change  to  his  RE  code  or
narrative reason for separation.

According to DPPRS, Airmen are given an uncharacterized entry-level
separation when separation is initiated in the first  180  days  of
continuous  active  service.   The  Department  of  Defense   (DoD)
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.  Therefore, his uncharacterized
character of service is correct and in accordance with DoD and  Air
Force instructions.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

He willingly  asks  that  his  discharge  characterization  not  be
changed and takes full responsibility for his actions.  He believes
he has made a significant  change  in  his  life  and  would  be  a
valuable  asset  to  the  Air  Force.   He  provides  post  service
documentation  in  the  form  of  a  college  transcript,   awards,
certification and a resume that he feels will reflect  the  changes
he has made as well as his accomplishments.

The applicant requests his RE code be changed to  allow  enlistment
in the Air National Guard.

Applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at 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  to  warrant
changing the applicant’s reenlistment eligibility  (RE)  code.   We
took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in  judging  the
merits of the  case,  however;  we  agree  with  the  opinions  and
recommendations 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.
Therefore, in the absence of 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-2005-03254 in Executive Session on 5  January  2006,  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. John B. Hennessey, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Joseph D. Yount, Member
                 Mr. Charles E. Bennett, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 29 Sep 05, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 7 Nov 05.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Nov 05.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 20 Nov 05.





                                   JOHN B. HENNESSEY
                                   Panel Chair