RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-00910
		INDEX CODE:  112.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed to an RE-1.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She struggled in tech school.  She did not choose to be a security forces member.

Applicant did not submit any documents in support the appeal.

Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 5 February 2002.  Enlistment documents reveal that she was guaranteed classification into an Air Force Specialty (AFS) in the General Aptitude Area without a promise of a specific specialty.

Following her successful completion of basic military training, on 6 May 2002, the applicant was assigned to duties as a Security Forces trainee.  On 30 May 2002, she was disenrolled from training due to academic deficiency over which it was determined she had control.  It was reported that she failed to achieve a passing score on the second written test two times and that the applicant lacked the desire and aptitude to successfully complete the training or to have a successful Air Force career.

On 13 June 2002, discharge proceedings were initiated against the applicant under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 and AFPD 36-32 (Entry Level Performance and Conduct).  The applicant was advised of her rights and waived her rights to consult counsel and submit statements in her own behalf.  The file was reviewed and found legally sufficient by an assistant staff judge advocate.  On 17 June 2002, the discharge authority approved the recommended separation and directed that the applicant be given an Entry Level Separation.  

On 21 June 2002, while serving in the grade of airman basic, the applicant was separated from the Air Force under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen (Entry-Level Performance and Conduct) and received an uncharacterized entry-level separation.  She was assigned a reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2C.  She served 4 months and 17 days of total active service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS states that 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.

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

AFPC/DPPAE states that the reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2C, “Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service” is correct.

A complete copy of their evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 4 June 2003, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant for review and response 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 timely filed.

3.	Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.  We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force and adopt their rationale as the basis for the conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  Therefore, 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 this application, BC-2003-00910, in Executive Session on 31 July 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

				Panel Chair
				Member
				Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 27 Feb 03.
	Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.	Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 15 Apr 03.
	Exhibit D.	Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 3 Jun 03.
	Exhibit E.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Jun 03.

					
					Acting Panel Chair