RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-02560
		INDEX NUMBER:  110.00
	XXXXXXX	COUNSEL:  None

	XXXXXXX	HEARING DESIRED:  Yes

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

She be reinstated to active duty or, in the alternative, be granted a Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code that will allow her to enter the Reserves.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She feels she deserves another chance to serve in the Air Force.  She never got into trouble while she was in the Air Force.  She joined under an open contract and feels she was placed in a job that was not right for her.  She tried her best, but was never able to catch on in the job she was placed in.

The applicant’s complete application, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant entered active duty on 24 Feb 04.  On 23 Jun 04, her squadron section commander (CCQ) notified her he was recommending her discharge from the Air Force for entry level performance or conduct.  The specific reason was the applicant’s failure to make progress in a required training program as noted below:

	  a.  She failed the Block III written exam with a 68.3% and, subsequently passed the retest.

	  b.  She failed three progress checks (PC) in Blocks I through III with scores of 60%, 58%, and 60%.  The minimum passing score was 70%.

	  c.  She was disenrolled from technical training on 14 Jun 04.

The applicant acknowledged receipt of notification on 23 Jun 04 and waived her right to consult counsel and to submit statements in her behalf.  On 23 Jun 04, the CCQ recommended to the training group commander the applicant be discharged for the reasons stated above and she be furnished an entry-level separation.  On 29 Jun 04, the wing staff judge advocate found the proposed discharge action legally sufficient to support the applicant’s discharge and recommended the training group commander approve her discharge with an entry-level separation.  On 9 Jul 04, the training group commander directed the applicant be discharged with an entry-level separation.  The applicant was discharged on 12 Jul 04 with an entry-level separation with uncharacterized character of service.  She received a “2C” RE code, “Entry-level separation without characterization of service.”

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial of the applicant’s request.  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 applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.  Airmen are given entry-level separation/uncharacterized service characterization when separation is initiated in the first 180 days continuous active service.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

In her response to the Air Force evaluation, the applicant explains the difficulties she had in technical training and the actions she took to try and complete the training.  She states when she was notified of the discharge action, she became upset and did not fully understand the consequences of waiving her right to an attorney.  She now understands she is not able to further her military career, which was not her intent or goal.  She wants it understood that her conduct and performance as an airman is not in question.  Rather, it is her performance and ability to be a dental assistant and dental laboratory technician.  She states she was a good airman and proved herself by completing basic training.  She is willing to do whatever is necessary to continue her Air Force career.  If necessary, she will make a personal appearance before the Board.

The applicant’s complete response 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 error or injustice regarding the applicant’s request for reinstatement to the Air Force.  After reviewing all of the evidence provided and weighing the circumstances of her entry-level separation, we do not believe it would be appropriate to directly reinstate the applicant.  However, we do find sufficient evidence to grant the applicant’s alternate request to be granted an RE code that will possibly allow her to reenter the Air Force or join the Reserves.  While we found no error in the processing of her separation from the Air Force and her eventual entry-level separation, we note she joined the Air Force on an open contract and had little input in choosing the dental technician career specialty she was assigned.  It appears she was not well suited for this specialty, despite her indicated efforts to successfully complete the training.  Since her failure was apparently due to academic factors and not the result of any misconduct, we believe granting a waiverable RE code, which would, at least, allow her to apply for future military service, is appropriate.  Additionally, we note the narrative reason for the applicant’s separation listed in Block 28 on the DD Form 214 indicates “entry-level performance and conduct.”  In similar cases considered previously by the Board, we have determined the word “conduct” in the context used, to be overly harsh and misleading and have corrected records to show that this word be removed from Block 28 of the DD Form 214.  We believe this to be an appropriate correction in this instance.  Therefore, we recommend the applicant’s records be corrected as indicated below.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that:

	  a.  At the time of her entry-level separation on 12 July 2004, she was issued a Reenlistment Eligibility Code of “3K.”

	  b.  The words “and conduct” be deleted from Block 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) on her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2004-02560 in Executive Session on 2 February 2005, 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 10 Aug 04, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 23 Aug 04.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Aug 04.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 31 Aug 04.

AFBCMR BC-2004-02560

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 XXXXXXX, XXXXXXX, be corrected to show that:

		  a.  At the time of her entry-level separation on 12 July 2004, she was issued a Reenlistment Eligibility Code of “3K.”

		  b.  The words “and conduct” be deleted from Block 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) on her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty.