RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-00938
		INDEX CODE:  112.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of RE-2C be changed.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

During his year of enlistment his grandfather became very ill.  Due to the nature of his illness he was emotionally unprepared to take on the responsibilities of being an airman.  Now since his grandfather has died he feels that he is mentally, physically and highly motivated toward a career in the military.  He trusts the Board will make a positive decision on his request and allow him the opportunity to serve and make a positive difference in today’s Air Force.

In support of the appeal, applicant submits a copy of the death certificate of his grandfather.  Applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 29 August 2000 in the grade of airman first class (E-3) for a period of six years.

On 1 August 2001, applicant’s commander notified him that he was recommending discharge from the Air Force for unsatisfactory duty performance.  The bases for the commander’s recommendation for discharge:  (1) On 12 July 2001, applicant failed Block II, Version B test with a score of 60 percent and the minimum passing score was 70 percent.  (2) On 11 June 2001, applicant failed Block I, Version B test with a score of 55 percent and the minimum passing score was 70 percent.  (3) In April 2001, applicant was eliminated from the Traffic Management Apprentice Course for academic deficiencies.  (4) In March 2001, applicant was eliminated from the Aircraft Armament Systems Apprentice Course for academic deficiencies.

On 1 August 2001, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification for discharge and waived his rights to consult with legal counsel and submit statements in his own behalf.  The base legal office reviewed the case and recommended the applicant be separated with an honorable discharge without probation and rehabilitation (P&R).  The discharge authority approved the separation and directed applicant be discharged with an honorable discharge without P&R.

Applicant was separated from the Air Force on 22 August 2001 under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen (unsatisfactory performance), with an honorable discharge.  An RE-2C (Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge) was assigned.  He had served 11 months and 23 days on active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS states that discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  The discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority.  Therefore, they recommend denial of applicant’s request.

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 9 April 2004, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was 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 probable error or injustice.  After reviewing the evidence of record, the majority of the Board is not persuaded that the applicant’s records are in error or that he has been the victim of an injustice.  He has not provided any new evidence or identified any error or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.  In addition, no evidence has been provided that would lead the majority of the Board to believe he is now able to successfully complete the academic studies that would be required for any Air Force specialty to which he would be assigned.  Therefore, the majority of the Board agrees with opinion and recommendation of the Air Force and adopts their rationale as the basis for the conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  In view of the above, the majority of the Board finds no basis upon which to recommend favorable action on 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 this application in Executive Session on 27 May 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 
By a majority vote, the Board recommended denial of the application.  Ms. XXXXX voted to correct the records but does not desire to submit a Minority Report.  The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR Docket No. BC-2004-00938:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 28 Jan 02, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 1 Apr 04.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Apr 04.

AFBCMR BC-2004-00938

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD 
				FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS (AFBCMR)

SUBJECT:  AFBCMR Application of 

	I have carefully reviewed the evidence of record and the recommendation of the Board members.  A majority found that applicant had not provided substantial evidence of error or injustice and recommended the case be denied.  I concur with that finding and their conclusion that relief is not warranted.  Accordingly, I accept their recommendation that the application be denied.

	Please advise the applicant accordingly.

							

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD FOR 
				   CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS (AFBCMR)

FROM:  SAF/MRB

SUBJECT:  , AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2004-00938

	I have carefully considered all aspects of this case and do not agree with the majority of the panel that the applicant’s request should be denied.

	After reviewing the available documentation, I believe applicant’s reenlistment eligibility (RE) code should be changed, on the basis of clemency based on the reason that he was emotionally unprepared to take on the responsibilities of being an airman.

	After reviewing the circumstances surrounding his separation, I find no evidence that his separation and the corresponding reenlistment eligibility (RE) code he received are in error.  Nevertheless, based on the circumstances presented in this case, I do believe he should be provided the opportunity to apply for enlistment in the service if he so desires.  While the applicant apparently experienced academic difficulties while assigned to duties as a technical trainee, he has offered a plausible explanation for his inability to concentrate on his studies.  I note that the file contains no reference to any disciplinary difficulties.  In view of this fact, as a matter of clemency, it is my decision that his RE code be changed to “3K.”  This code is waiverable and will provide him the opportunity to apply for enlistment in the Armed Forces.  Whether or not he is successful will depend on the needs of the services and my recommendation in no way guarantees that he will be allowed to return to the Air Force or any branch of the service.

					

 

AFBCMR BC-2004-00938

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 to show that at the time of his discharge on 22 August 2001, he was issued a Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of “3K.”