RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:		DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-01615
		INDEX CODE: 112.10
 						COUNSEL:  NONE
			  		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 25 NOVEMBER 2008

______________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  His reenlistment (RE) code be changed so he can enlist in the United States Navy (USN). 

2.  The applicant makes comment that he believes he was paying into the Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) but makes no specific request for relief.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was discharged because of too many course failures during technical school.  He believes this was an injustice because during technical school, he was concerned about his mother who had suddenly become ill; therefore, he was not able to give his undivided attention to his training.  Now that he is much older and mature, he now realizes he should not have allowed this to affect his training to the degree it did.  It is his desire to join the USN and serve his country. 

In support of his request, the applicant submits a personal letter. 

His complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Air Force on 30 August 2005 in the grade of airman basic.  On 11 January 2006, applicant was notified by his commander that he was recommending he be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFI 3208, Administrative Separation of Airman (entry-level performance and conduct), with an uncharacterized entry-level separation.  The specific reasons for this action were his failure of Block 1, Test A twice and Block II, Test A, with scores of 68%, 68% and 66%, respectively.  The minimum passing score was 70%.  As a result of these failures, he was disenrolled from training.

He acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge and waived his right to consult counsel and submit statements on his own behalf.  In a legal review of his case, the base legal office found it legally sufficient to support separation and recommended he be discharged with an entry-level separation.  

Applicant was discharged in the grade of airman basic on 26 August 2006 with an uncharacterized entry-level separation.

He received an RE code of “2C” which denotes "Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service."

He served 4 months and 26 days on active duty.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  DPPRS states 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 not identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge process.  Additionally, he provided no facts warranting a change in his RE code or narrative reason for separation.

The complete DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPAT states the applicant makes the statement "I believe I was paying into the G.I. Bill." but does not provide a clear explanation regarding his request.  The applicant contributed $400.00 of the required $1,200 contribution for participation in the MGIB program prior to his separation.  In addition, the applicant was asked to identify what the error or injustice was regarding his belief that he was paying into the MGIB.  The applicant provided no response.  DPPAT can confirm that he did begin to contribute toward the MGIB; however, since the applicant does not clarify his statement, DPPAT cannot provide a recommendation.

The complete DPPAT evaluation is at Exhibit D.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 3 August 2007 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this office has received no response (Exhibit E).

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations.

2.  The application was time filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice regarding the applicant’s RE code and enrollment in the MGIB.  We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case, however; we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our 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.

4. Notwithstanding the above, we believe relief is warranted with respect to the applicant's narrative reason for separation.  We note that the discharge action taken against the applicant was in accordance with the applicable instruction.  However, after reviewing the applicant’s request and the evidence of record, we find the narrative reason for his entry- level separation; i.e., entry-level performance and conduct, to be inappropriate.  In our deliberations 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 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 the applicant’s records be corrected by deleting the words “and conduct” from his narrative reason for separation.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS:

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.

________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2007-01615 in Executive Session on 12 September 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

All members voted to correct the records, as recommended.  The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2007-01615 was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated May 17, 2007, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  AFPC/DPPRS Letter, dated 8 June 2007.
    Exhibit D.  AFPC/DPPAT Letter, dated 24 Jul 2007.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 August 2007.