RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-00426
		INDEX CODE:  110.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2C be changed to allow eligibility to reenter the Air Force Reserve.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The reasons the applicant believes the records to be in error or unjust and the evidence submitted in support of the appeal are at Exhibit A.

In support of her request, the applicant submits copies of her DD Form 214, AF Form 100 and DD Form 293.  The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant contracted her enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 2 Nov 00 for a period of 4 years.  On 1 Feb 01, the applicant received notification that she was being recommended for discharge for entry level performance and conduct.  The reason for this action was the applicant’s failure to make satisfactory progress in a required training program.  She received an uncharacterized entry-level separation on 13 Feb 01 under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (entry-level performance and conduct).  She had completed a total of 3 months and 12 days and was serving in the grade of airman basic (E-1) at the time of separation.  She received an RE Code of 2C, which defined means "Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry-level separation without characterization of service."
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS stated that, based upon the documentation in the file, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  DPPRS indicated that airmen are given entry-level separation/uncharacterized service characterization when separation is initiated in the first 180 days of continuous active service.  The applicant’s uncharacterized character of service 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 HQ AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

HQ AFPC/DPPAE stated that the applicant’s RE code of 2C is correct.  The HQ AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to applicant on 21 June 2002 for review and response.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit E).
_________________________________________________________________

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 error or injustice concerning the applicant’s RE code.  The applicant has provided no evidence showing that her assigned RE code is in error or contrary to the prevailing instruction.  The RE code which was issued at the time of applicant’s separation accurately reflects the circumstances of her separation and we do not find this code to be in error or unjust.  We, therefore, conclude that no basis exists upon which to recommend favorable action on her request that it be changed.

4.	Notwithstanding the above, we find the narrative reason for the applicant’s entry level separation; i.e., entry level performance and conduct, to be overly harsh.  In our deliberations of this case, it appeared to us that the word “conduct” could be misconstrued to infer that her separation for academic deficiency was also due to misconduct.  While the applicant may have had problems progressing in the required technical training course, we have seen no evidence of misconduct.  Therefore, in order to correct an injustice of improperly labeling the applicant, her narrative reason for separation should be corrected to accurately reflect the circumstances of her separation.  In view of the foregoing, we recommend the applicant’s records be corrected by deleting the words “and conduct” from her narrative reason for separation.
_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to APPLICANT be corrected by deleting the words “and conduct” from Block 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) on her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, issued on 13 February 2001.
_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered Docket Number 02‑00426 in Executive Session on 23 July 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

All members voted to correct the records, as recommended.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 13 Feb 01, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 11 Mar 02.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAE, dated 11 Jun 02.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Jun 02.