-                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  01-01091
		INDEX CODE 100.06
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code and narrative reason for separation be changed.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He did not willfully leave out unfavorably information while preparing his security clearance.  He filled the form out to the best of his knowledge.

Applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant's military records, are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force.  Accordingly, there is no need to recite these facts in this Record of Proceedings.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Assistant Noncommissioned In Charge, Separation Procedures Branch, AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed the application and recommended denial stating based upon the documentation in the file, they believe the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  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.  Therefore, his uncharacterized character of service and his separation code is correct and in accordance with Department of Defense and Air Force Instructions.  An entry-level/uncharacterized separation should not be viewed as negative and should not be confused with other types of separation.  The applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.  Additionally, he provided no facts warranting a change in his separation code. Accordingly, they recommend his records remain the same and his request be denied.

A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

The Assistant Chief, Skills Management Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPAE, reviewed the applicant’s request and states the Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of 2C, “Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service” is correct.

A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Complete copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 15 June 2001, for review and response within 30 days.  However, 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 timely filed.

3.	Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.  We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force and adopt their 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 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 of newly discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 15 August 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

			Panel Chair
			Member
			Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 29 Mar 01, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.	Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 10 May 01.
	Exhibit D.	Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 14 May 01.
	Exhibit E.	Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 15 Jun 01.

	
	Panel Chair