RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03214
		INDEX CODE:  110.02
	 	COUNSEL:   

	 	HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed.

_________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He has been a law-abiding citizen since his separation from the Air Force and it is unjust for him to be precluded from enlisting in the Armed Forces because he could not pass a test.

In support of the appeal, the applicant submits a copy of a Letter of Appointment, three Letters of Recommendation, two Police Explorer Certificates, a copy of his resume, an Attorney Declaration, and a copy of a family photo.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 31 May 2000.  On 26 September 2000, he was notified by his commander that he was being recommended for discharge for entry-level performance and conduct.  The reason for this action was that he was eliminated from the Security Forces Technical Training Course for academic deficiency after failing block II three times with scores of 66%, 54% and 68%.  The minimum passing score was 70%.  Prior to disenrollment, he was counseled concerning his academic failure and received 6 hours of special individualized assistance.  The discharge authority approved the separation and ordered an honorable discharge.  

On 26 September 2000, he was discharged under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen  (entry-level performance and conduct) and was issued an uncharacterized discharge.  He received a RE code of 2C, Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry- level separation without characterization of service.  He served 3 months and 26 days on active duty.

Applicant does not contest the accuracy of the RE code and after reviewing the applicable instruction, AFI 36-2606, it appears the RE code issued is accurate.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRSP recommends denial.  Airmen are given entry-level separation/uncharacterized service characterization when separation is initiated in the first 180 days of continuous active service.  The Department of Defense (DoD) determined if a member served less than 180 days of continuous active service, it would be unfair to the member and the service to characterize their limited service.  Therefore, his uncharacterized character of service is correct and in accordance with DoD and Air Force instructions.  The applicant did submit several character references however; he did not submit any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge process.  Additionally, he provided no facts warranting a change in his discharge.  

The DPPRSP evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant’s attorney points out that his client’s separation was not a result of any misconduct but instead because of his inability to pass a test.

He also states that certain misconduct may make an individual incompatible with military service the same cannot be said for failing to pass a test.  His client came within two points of passing the test on his last attempt.  He submits, that given his clients narrow margin of failure and the three years he has had to mature and improve as a person since his separation, that an RE code that does not permit him to freely re-enlist is unjust and will deprive the military of a determined motivated individual who wishes to serve his country.

The applicant’s complete submission is at 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 an error or injustice.  Applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, we are not persuaded that the applicant has been the victim of an error or injustice.  At the time members are separated from the Air Force, they are furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality of their service and circumstances of their separation.  After a thorough review of the evidence of record, we believe that given the circumstances surrounding the applicant’s separation, the RE code issued was in accordance with the appropriate directives.  Therefore, we find no basis upon which to recommend granting relief sought in this application.

4.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been provided to demonstrate the existence of injustice that would warrant a change in the reason for separation.  After reviewing his submission and the evidence of record, we are persuaded that some relief is warranted.  We note that the separation action taken against the applicant was in accordance with the applicable instruction.  However, after reviewing the evidence of record, it is our opinion that the narrative reason for his entry-level separation, “entry-level performance and conduct,” is overly harsh.  In our deliberation 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 his own 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 that 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 26 September 2000.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2003-03214 in Executive Session on 10 December 2003, 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 23 Sep 03, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.	Letter, AFPC/DPPRSP, dated 16 Oct 03.
	Exhibit D.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 31 Oct 03.
	Exhibit E.	Letter, Applicant’s Attorney, dated 7 Nov 03.

                                   

AFBCMR BC-2003-03214

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 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 26 September 2000.