RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-01670
		INDEX NUMBER:  100.06, 110.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed from RE-2 to RE-1 to permit reentry into the military.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was separated because of academic reasons.  He does not believe barring him from enlistment is fair for failing a test.  He believes he can succeed in the Air Force if allowed to reenlist.

Applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 5 Mar 02, in the grade of airman basic (E-1), for a period of four years.

On 30 May 02, applicant was notified of his commander’s intent to recommend him for an entry level separation for failure to make satisfactory progress in a required training program.  The commander stated the following reasons for the proposed discharge.

     a.  On 17 May 02, member failed Test 1 Version A with a score of 56 percent – minimum passing score was 70 percent.  

     b.  On 22 May 02, member failed Test 1 Version B with a score of 42 percent – minimum passing score was 70 percent.  

On 30 May 02, applicant waived his option to consult legal counsel and to submit statements in his own behalf.  On 31 May 02, the Air Education and Training Command attorney advisor found the case file to be legally sufficient to support separation.  On 3 Jun 02, the discharge authority directed an entry-level separation.

On 11 Jun 02, applicant received an uncharacterized entry level separation, by reason of entry level performance and conduct, and was issued a reenlistment eligibility (RE) Code of 2C (involuntarily separated with an entry level separation).  He served three months and seven days active military service.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied, and states, in part, based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  The discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority.

Applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.  He provided no facts warranting a change to the narrative reason for separation or a change to his reenlistment eligibility code.

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 determined if a member served less than 180 days 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 Department of Defense and Air Force instructions.

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

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 18 Jun 04, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days.  To date, a reply has not been received by this office (Exhibit D).

___________________________________________________________________

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.  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.  After careful consideration of the evidence provided, we are not persuaded that the assigned RE code is in error or unjust or that an upgrade of the RE code is warranted.  Therefore, we find no basis upon which to recommend favorable action on 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‑2004-01670 in Executive Session on 17 August 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36‑2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 17 May 04, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 14 Jun 04.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Jun 04.