RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-00322
		INDEX CODE:  110.02
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reason for separation be changed so that he may qualify for Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) benefits.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, should state that he was discharged at the request of the government for not passing the Career Development Courses (CDCs) due to a lack of proper training.  His complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 16 Jun 99.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of airman first class, having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 6 Dec 01.  On 22 Feb 02, applicant was notified by his commander that he was recommending that he be discharged from the Air Force in accordance with AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5.26.3.  The specific reason for this action was on 2 Nov 00, he failed his end-of-course (EOC) examination with a score of 64%.  He was allowed to retest, and on 2 Feb 01, he failed the EOC examination again with a score of 64%.  He was advised of his rights in this matter and acknowledged receipt of the notification on that same date.  After consulting counsel, applicant elected not to submit statements on his own behalf.  In a legal review of the case, the wing staff judge advocate, found the case legally sufficient and recommended that he be discharged with an honorable discharge, without probation and rehabilitation.  On 22 Mar 02, the discharge authority concurred with the recommendation and directed that he be discharged without probation and rehabilitation.  Applicant was discharged from the Air Force on 29 Mar 02.  He served 2 years, 9 months, and 14 days on active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPAT states that the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) under Title 38 USC may grant education benefits to a veteran if he or she receives an honorable discharge and serves a particular amount of active duty.  The DVA may grant benefits to veterans discharged for the same reason as the applicant if they serve full terms of obligated active duty.  The DVA will not award benefits to the applicant because his discharge reason requires that he serve a full term of active duty.  The applicant may qualify for benefits if the discharge reason is changed to one that allows benefits after service of at least 30 months of active duty.

The DPPAT evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  DPPRS states that the applicant's records clearly indicate he was afforded the necessary time and additional training prior to disenrollment.  He failed the EOC examinations with scores of 64% on both.  His commander considered the possibility of retraining, but the applicant's duty performance was substandard and his personal interactions within his work center were problematic.  He was recommended for discharge because of his behavioral problems, failure to respond to extra one-on-one training for failure to put forth the effort required for improvement.  His discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority.  He did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors that occurred in the discharge processing.  The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 21 Mar 03 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations.

2.  The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice that would warrant changing the applicant's narrative reason for separation.  After a thorough review of the evidence of record, we find no error in this case and are not persuaded by his contentions that he has been the victim of an injustice.  It is our opinion that the actions to affect his discharge from the Air Force were proper, in compliance with the provisions of regulations in effect at the time, and were the direct result of his inability to meet Air Force training standards.  We agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no 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 BC-2003-00322 in Executive Session on 29 May 03, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 26 Jan 03.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAT, dated 6 Mar 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 11 Mar 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Mar 03.

                                   
                                   Panel Chair