RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:				DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-02601
							INDEX CODE:  110.00
    							COUNSEL:  NONE

    							HEARING DESIRED:  NO

__________________ _______________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His uncharacterized discharge be upgraded to honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His separation document (DD 214) states entry-level performance and conduct as reason for separation; however, speeding and other motor vehicle infractions were obtained prior to enlistment.  These infractions should have been discovered prior to allowing his enlistment.  

In support of the application, the applicant submits a copy of his discharge notification letter, a copy of his separation request, a copy of the Notification of Nuclear Weapons Personnel Reliability Program Permanent Decertification/Disqualification Action form, a copy of his receipt of notification memorandum, a copy of his discharge memorandum, a copy of his separation document (member 1 & 4), and a copy of the Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States.  The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 16 December 2003, 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 6 years.  He completed Basic Military Training school in January 2003, and was assigned as a Missile & Space Systems Maintenance Helper.  

At the request of the training squadron commander, an initial screening for a Controlled Personnel Reliability Program (PRP) position was performed.  As a result, significant disciplinary infractions were discovered, including several preservice violations to include a vehicular speeding violation, seatbelt violation, careless/reckless driving violation, failure to keep right, and failure to yield tickets.  In addition, the applicant received a speeding ticket while assigned to his unit.

On 3 May 2004, his commander determined that the applicant had significant Potentially Disqualifying Information (PDI), and disapproved an administrative certification recommendation.

On 7 June 2004, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was recommending he be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-3208, Chapter 5 for Entry Level Performance or Conduct: failure to make satisfactory progress in a required training program.  Additionally, the commander indicated the applicant had been reclassified once before in his Air Force career, and had requested separation in lieu of being reclassified.  The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification and waived his rights to consult counsel and submit statements in his own behalf.  On 18 June 2004, the discharge case file was reviewed and coordinated on in the Wing Staff Judge Advocate’s office.  The recommended separation was subsequently approved by the discharge authority, who directed that the applicant be separated with an uncharacterized entry-level separation.

On 7 July 2004, the applicant was separated with an entry-level separation because of Entry-Level Performance and Conduct.  He had served 6 months and 22 days on active duty.  An uncharacterized character of service was assigned.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  DPPRS states 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 asserts 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 (DoD) determined if a member served less than 180 days of continuous service, it would be unfair to the member and the service to characterize their limited service.  Therefore, the applicant’s uncharacterized character of service is correct and in accordance with DoD and Air Force instructions.  DPPRS notes the applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge process, nor did he provide any facts warranting a change to his character of service.

The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment on 8 October 2004.  As of this date, this office has received no response (Exhibit D).

_________________________________________________________________

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 an error or injustice.  The Board majority is not persuaded by the evidence presented that the entry-level separation characterization received by the former member should be changed to an honorable discharge.  It appears that under the given circumstances at that time, responsible officials applied appropriate standards in effecting his discharge action.  The applicant’s contentions and supporting documentation were duly noted.  However, his uncharacterized entry level separation was, by regulation, required based on the fact that separation proceedings were initiated within 180 days of his entry on active duty.  In view of the number of disciplinary incidents that occurred and the fact that the applicant was reclassified into another career field on one previous occasion during this time period, the Board majority does not find an exception to this policy is warranted in this case.  Therefore, based on the available evidence of record, the Board majority finds no basis upon which to favorably consider this application.

_________________________________________________________________

RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD:

A majority of the panel finds insufficient evidence of error or injustice and recommends the application be denied.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 1 March 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

By a majority vote, the members voted to deny the request.  voted to correct the record and did not desire to submit a minority report.  The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC-2004-02601:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 5 Sep 04 w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 1 Oct 04.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Oct 04.

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD
			      FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS (AFBCMR)

SUBJECT:  AFBCMR Application of , AFBCMR BC-2004-02601

	I have carefully reviewed the evidence of record and the recommendation of the Board members.  A majority found that the applicant had not provided sufficient evidence of error or injustice and recommended the case be denied.  I concur with that finding and their conclusion that relief is not warranted.  Accordingly, I accept their recommendation that the application be denied.

	Please advise the applicant accordingly.