RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-00632
                       INDEX CODE:  110.00
                       COUNSEL:  NONE

                       HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  2 SEPTEMBER 2008

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His character of service be upgraded.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He made a mistake and would like  another  opportunity  to  serve  his
country.

In support of his request, the applicant provided a  copy  of  his  DD
Form 214 and character references.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular  Air  Force  (RegAF)  on  3 June
2003, as an airman (Amn) for a period of four years.

On 20 June 2003, the applicant was notified of his commander’s  intent
to recommend him for an entry-level separation  for  fraudulent  entry
for the following reason:

      On 15 January 2003, the applicant executed AF  Form  2030,  USAF
Drug Certificate and indicated that he had used or  experimented  with
marijuana and never used or possessed any illegal  drug  or  narcotic.
On 3 June 2003, the applicant certified that he had not used any drug,
including marijuana since he originally completed the form.  On 6 June
2003, the applicant submitted a urine sample  to  be  tested  for  the
presence of drugs.  On 17 June  2003,  the  applicant’s  specimen  was
determined to be positive for the drug marijuana.  Had the Air
Force known of the applicant’s pre-service drug involvement  it  would
have rendered him ineligible to enlist.

The commander advised the applicant of his right  to  consult  legal
counsel, and if he so desired an  appointment  would  be  made  upon
request, and to submit statements in his own behalf.  He was advised
that failure to consult with  counsel  or  submit  statements  could
constitute his waiver of his rights to do so.

On 20 June 2003, the applicant waived his right to  consult  counsel
and to submit a statement.

On 23 June 2003, the base legal office reviewed the applicant’s case
and  found  it  legally  sufficient  to   support   separation   and
recommended  the  applicant  be  separated   with   an   entry-level
separation.

On 24 June 2003, the discharge authority approved the separation and
directed the applicant be discharged with an entry-level separation.

On 26 June 2003, the applicant was separated with  an  uncharacterized
entry-level  separation  under  the   provisions   of   AFI   36-3208,
Administrative Separation of Airman (entry-level  –  fraudulent  entry
into military service – drug abuse).  Since the applicant’s enlistment
was considered fraudulent his total active service was non-creditable.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of  investigation,
Washington, D.C., indicated on the basis of the  data  furnished  they
were unable to locate an arrest record (Exhibit C).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ  AFPC/DPPRS  recommends  denial.    They   state   based   on   the
documentation on file in the applicant’s master personnel records, the
discharge  was  consistent  with  the   procedural   and   substantive
requirements of the discharge regulation.  The  discharge  was  within
the discretion of the discharge authority.

Airmen  are  given  an  entry-level  separation  when  separation   is
initiated in the first 180 days of  continuous  active  service.   The
Department of Defense (DoD) determined if a servicemember served  less
than 180 days of continuous active service, it would be unfair to  the
servicemember and the service to characterize their limited service.

The applicant did not submit any evidence or identify  any  errors  or
injustices that occurred in the processing of his discharge.

AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 6
April 2007, for review and response.  As of this date, no response has
been received by this office.

_________________________________________________________________

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   an   injustice.    After   careful
consideration of the circumstances  of  this  case  and  the  evidence
provided by the applicant, we are not persuaded that  the  applicant's
entry-level separation should be upgraded.  In this respect,  we  note
that discharge process was initiated prior to the  applicant  reaching
180 days of active duty.  We further note that an individual is  given
an    entry-level    separation    with    uncharacterized     service
characterization when the separation action commences within the first
180  days  of  continuous  active  service.   It  appears   that   the
applicant's discharge processing was  appropriate  and  in  compliance
with the  governing  directives.   Applicant’s  contentions  are  duly
noted; however, we agree with the opinion and  recommendation  of  the
Air Force and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that
the applicant has not been the victim of an error or an injustice.  In
this respect, the applicant withheld pertinent  information  regarding
his pre-service drug use, which if known at the time of enlistment may
well have precluded his entry on active duty.  Therefore, in  view  of
the above and 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-
2007-00632 in Executive Session on 14 June 2007 under  the  provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

                       Mr. James W. Russell III, Panel Chair
                       Ms. Glenda H. Scheiner, Member
                       Mr. Michael F. McGhee, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 Mar 07, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. FBI Report.
      Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 30 Mar 07.
      Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Apr 07.




                             JAMES W. RUSSELL III
                             Panel Chair