RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-00727
		INDEX CODE:  100.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED: NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2C (Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service) be changed.
___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was given an RE code of 2C because he failed his yearly exam, not because of legal, moral or ethical reasons.  He would like to reenlist in another branch of service (Army) but the 2C code is keeping him from being able to enter.  

He believes RE code 2C was not the correct code.  

In support of his appeal, applicant submitted a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, dated 2 May 01.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 20 Jan 99 for a period of six years.  He was promoted to the grade of airman first class with an effective date and date of rank (DOR) of 26 May 99.  He received two performance reports with promotion recommendation ratings of four (on a scale of one to five).

On 30 Mar 01, the squadron commander initiated administrative discharge action against the applicant for Unsatisfactory Performance--Failure to Progress in On-the-Job Training (OJT).

The reasons for the proposed action were that on 2 Nov 00 and 6 Feb 01, applicant failed to make satisfactory progress in a required OJT program.  The applicant was eliminated from the Security Forces Apprentice training course for academic deficiency after failing the end-of-course examination twice, with scores of 63% and 55%--minimum passing was 65%.  Prior to disenrollment, applicant was counseled concerning his performance and received individualized assistance with negative results.

Other derogatory information cited by the commander included applicant’s receipt of four letters of reprimand between 1 Dec 99 and 1 May 00, for failure to go to mandatory Family Support appointments on 31 Nov 99 and 3 Jan 00, failure to complete his first volume for his Career Development Course (CDC), number 3P051, prior to the pre-established deadline, and for failure to go to a mandatory cycle ergometry appointment on 27 Apr 00.

The commander recommended that the applicant be given an honorable discharge.  On that same date, applicant acknowledged receipt of the discharge notification.  After consulting with counsel, applicant waived his right to submit statements in his own behalf.  On 6 Apr 01, the staff judge advocate found the case to be legally sufficient and recommended an honorable discharge without probation and rehabilitation.  On 19 Apr 01, the discharge authority approved the honorable discharge.

On 2 May 2001, applicant was honorably discharged by reason of “Unsatisfactory Performance,” and was issued an RE code of 2C.  He was credited with 2 years, 3 months, and 13 days of active duty service.
___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial of applicant’s request.  They found that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  Additionally, that the discharge was within the sound discretion of the discharge authority.  They also noted that the applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

HQ 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:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 30 May 03 for review and comment within 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 error or injustice.  At the time a member is separated from the Air Force, they are furnished an RE Code predicated upon the quality of their service and the circumstances of their separation.  The assigned code reflects the Air Force’s position regarding whether or not, or under what circumstances, the individual should be allowed to reenlist.  The evidence of record supports the stated reasons for applicant’s involuntary separation; i.e., his failure to make satisfactory progress in on‑the‑job training.  His assigned RE Code of 2C reflects his involuntary separation with an honorable discharge.  After careful consideration of the evidence provided, a majority of the Board was not persuaded that the assigned RE code is in error or unjust or that an upgrade of the RE code is warranted.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, a majority of the Board finds no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2003-00727 in Executive Session on 20 Aug 03, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

By a majority vote, the members voted to deny applicant's request.  Ms. Crerar voted to grant the applicant's request but did not desire to submit a minority report.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 26 Feb 03. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 31 Mar 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAE, dated 27 May 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 May 03.

                                   
                                   Panel Chair

MEMORANDUM FOR	THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS (AFBCMR)
SUBJECT:	AFBCMR Case on APPLICANT, AFBCMR: BC-2003-00727

	I have carefully reviewed the circumstances of this case and do not agree with the recommendation of the majority of the panel that applicant’s request to have his reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2C changed should be denied.

	After considering the evidence available for my review, I agree with the minority member of the panel that the applicant’s request should be granted.  In this regard, I noted the favorable comments in the applicant’s on-the-job (OJT) training records.  In his initial assessment, the supervisor stated the applicant had good study habits and one of the ways to improve his scores was for him to have more hands-on experience with the equipment.  In the second assessment, the commander stated that applicant’s supervisor recommended retaining the applicant and that he be given hands-on training.  Despite his difficulties with the testing portion of his training, the applicant appears to have remained motivated to try and complete the training program.  In view of this, I believe he should be afforded a second chance to serve.  Therefore, it is my decision that his RE code should be changed to “3K,” which is a code that can be waived for prior service enlistment consideration, provided he meets all other requirements for enlistment under an existing prior service program.

							
							Director
							Air Force Review Boards Agency

AFBCMR BC-2003-00727

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 APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 2 May 2001, he was discharged with Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code “3K.”

		
		Director
		Air Force Review Boards Agency