RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  01-03562
		INDEX CODE:  100.03

	 	COUNSEL:  NONE

	 	HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed so that he can serve in the Air Force Reserve.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He wants to continue his military career in the Air Force Reserve.  He has attached his letter that went to the Reserve recruiter and they are willing to take him on board if he can get his reentry code changed. He got a bad deal.  He would be a great benefit for the Reserve if his code were changed.

Applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 8 Jun 93, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force (RegAF) for a period of four years in the grade of airman basic.  On 14 Nov 96, he reenlisted in the Air Force for a period of six years in the grade of senior airman.

Applicant’s Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) profile follows:

            PERIOD ENDING          OVERALL EVALUATION

              7 Feb 95                     4
             18 Oct 95                     4
             18 Oct 96                     5
             18 Oct 97                     5
             18 Oct 98                     4
             30 Jun 99                     3
             30 Jun 00                     5
              1 Feb 01                     3 (Referral Rpt)

On 17 Apr 01, the applicant was notified that his commander was recommending that he be discharged from the Air Force for Unsatisfactory Performance under the provisions of paragraph 5.26.3, Failure to Progress in On-The-Job Training.  The commander was recommending that applicant receive an honorable discharge.  The reasons for the commander’s actions were as follows:

	a.  On 24 Nov 99, he was enrolled in Career Development Course (CDC) Number 2T071.  This course consisted of two volumes of study and was to be successfully completed no later than 26 Nov 00.  His supervisor and trainer explained the course to him and how the administration of said course operated.  He was told that 65% was a minimum passing score and also explained to him how to get help if he had questions about the CDC.  On 9 Dec 99, he was issued Volume I of the 7-level CDC.  In Feb 00, he completed Volume I and was issued Volume II.  A review of his training records was made that day and several items were closed out.  On 14 Feb 00, another assessment was made and several other items were closed out.  It appeared he was moving along satisfactorily on his CDC.  On 30 Mar 00, he reviewed Volume II and missed only one question on the review quiz, making a score of 99%.  His trainer reviewed over the missed item and believed he was ready for the end-of-course test.  On 31 Aug 00, his training records were reviewed and the final test was scheduled.  In Sep 00, he had shoulder surgery, but it was determined that this should not hinder his studies.  His first final testing was completed on 1 Nov 00.  The score on that test was 64%.  He had failed the first testing.

	b.  In an effort to study and pass the second final testing, he and his trainer reviewed the CDC course material.  There was no indication of a problem with comprehension.  He scored well on the exercises given to him and any missed items were gone over and discussed.  He was assigned to job duties relating to his CDCs and also was provided study time.  On 19 Dec 00, he took the second final test over CDC Course Number 2T071.  He scored 60% on that test.  A passing score was 65%.  He had failed the second final testing.

	c.  He had been briefed on his ineligibility for promotion, reenlistment, and reassignment while withdrawn from training.  Air Force Form 2096, signed by him, indicated he understood that his removal from upgrade training (UGT) may result in separation under the provisions of AFI 36‑3208.

On 19 Apr 01, after consulting with counsel, applicant offered a conditional waiver of the rights associated with an administrative discharge board hearing.  The waiver was contingent upon his receipt of no less than an honorable discharge, if the recommendation of his discharge was approved.

On 30 Apr 01, the commander accepted the conditional waiver of the applicant and directed that he be discharged from the Air Force for Unsatisfactory Performance under AFPD 36‑32 and AFI 36‑3208, paragraph 5.26.3, Failure to Progress in On-The-Job Training.  The characterization of the discharge would be honorable and probation and rehabilitation was denied.

On 14 May 01, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFI 36‑3208 (Unsatisfactory Performance) with an honorable characterization of service and an RE code of 2C (Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service) in the grade of staff sergeant.  He was credited with 7 years, 11 months, and 8 days of active service.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS reviewed this application and recommends denial.  They state that the applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.  Based on the documentation in the file, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation at that time.  Additionally, the discharge was within the sound discretion of the discharge authority.

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

AFPC/DPPAE also reviewed this application and indicated that the RE code of 2C is correct.

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

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluations and provided letters of recommendation, a letter from his congressman, an application for an Air Force Reserve position, and a letter from the commander of the 654th Combat Logistics Support Squadron.  He states that he was hurt while on active duty and was made to test for 7-level upgrade training while on medication and was told he had to test.  He asks that he be given the chance to go into the Air Force Reserve and give 100% to them and his country.

Applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit F.

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.  The Secretary of the Air Force has statutory authority to promulgate rules and regulations governing the administration of the Air Force.  In the exercise of that authority, he has determined that members separated from the Air Force would be furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality of their service and circumstances of their separation.  At the time an RE code is assigned, it reflects the Air Force position regarding whether or not, or under what circumstances, the individual should be allowed to reenlist.  There has been no showing that the Secretary abused this discretionary authority or that the particular RE code assigned was contrary to the prevailing directive.  Based on the foregoing, 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 Docket Number 01-03562 in Executive Session on 26 March 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36‑2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 5 Nov 01, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 14 Jan 02.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 1 Feb 02.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Feb 02.
	Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated 19 Feb 02, w/atch.