RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-01254
		INDEX CODE:  112.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He would like his RE code changed to reenlist into another branch of the service.  He indicates that he successfully completed basic training, however, while in technical school for Security Forces he had difficulty passing the test for that career field.  He inquired about cross training into another field but was told that was not an option.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provided a personal statement, a letter from the Army Recruiting Station, Waldorf, MD, dated 3 April 2002 and other documentation.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 19 June 2001 in the grade of airman basic for a period of four (4) years.

On 24 October 2001 applicant was notified of his commander's intent to initiate discharge action against him for entry level performance or conduct.  The specific reason was as follows:

	You have failed to make satisfactory progress in a required training program.  Specifically, you were eliminated from the Security Forces technical training course for academic deficiency after failing the first written test three times with scores of 56%, 60%, and 64%; minimum passing is 70%.  Prior to your disenrollment you were counseled concerning your academic failure and received 4 hours Special Individualized Assistance.  Efforts to improve your performance have met with negative results.  As a result, you were disenrolled from the Security Forces technical training course on 18 October 2001.

On 25 October 2001, the Assistant Staff Judge Advocate recommended that the applicant be separated from the service with an Entry Level Separation.

On 29 October 2001, the applicant’s discharge was approved.

Applicant was discharged on 20 November 2001, in the grade of airman basic with an Entry Level Performance and Conduct discharge, under the provisions of AFI 36-3208.  He served a total of 5 months and 2 days of total active military service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial.  They indicated that based upon the documentation in the file, they believe 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.  The applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify and errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.  He provided no other facts warranting a change in his discharge.  Accordingly, they recommend his records remain the same.

The evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPAE recommended denial.  They indicated that the applicant was discharged on 20 November 2001, after serving five (5) months and two (2) days active service.  The Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of 2C, “Involuntary separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service” is correct.

The evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 2 August 2002, copies of the evaluations were forwarded to the applicant for review and response within thirty (30) days.  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 an error or an injustice warranting a change in the applicant’s RE code.  We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and recommendations 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.  The Board believes that responsible officials applied appropriate standards in effecting the separation, and the Board does not find persuasive evidence that pertinent regulations were violated or that applicant was not afforded all the rights to which entitled at the time of discharge.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

4.	Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or an injustice warranting a change in the narrative reason for separation.  After reviewing the applicant’s submission and the evidence of record, we are persuaded that some relief is warranted.  We note that the discharge action taken against the applicant was in accordance with the applicable instruction.  However, after reviewing the applicant’s request and the evidence of record, we find the narrative reason for his entry level separation; i.e., entry level performance and conduct, to be inaccurate.  In our deliberations of this case, it appeared to us that the word “conduct” could be misconstrued to infer that his separation for academic deficiency was also due to misconduct.  While the applicant may have had problems progressing in the required technical training courses, we have seen no evidence of misconduct.  Therefore, in order to correct an injustice of improperly labeling the applicant, his narrative reason for separation should be corrected to accurately reflect the circumstances of his separation.  In view of the foregoing, we recommend the applicant’s records be corrected by deleting the words “and conduct” from his 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 his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, issued on 20 November 2001.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number 02-01254 in Executive Session on 25 September 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 3 April 2002, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 4 June 2002.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 30 July 2002.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 2 August 2002.

				

AFBCMR 02-01254

MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

	Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that:

	The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to  be corrected by deleting the words “and conduct” from Block 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, issued on 20 November 2001.