RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-02404
		INDEX CODE:  100.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED: NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment code of 2C, “involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service,” be changed to 3A, “first-term airman who separated before completing 36 months (60 months for a six year enlistee) on current enlistment and who has no known disqualifying factors or ineligibility conditions except grade, skill level, and insufficient total active federal military service (TAFMS).”  

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His separation was due to Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) test failure, not for disciplinary reasons, i.e., Article 15.

In support of his appeal, applicant submitted a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, issued on 18 Jun 04.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 29 Dec 03 for a period six years.  

On 1 Mar 04, applicant failed to obey a lawful order by wrongfully refusing to go to school.  For this offense, he received a Letter of Reprimand.

On 4 Mar 04, applicant failed Objective 105a with a score of 60%.  For this offense, he received a Letter of Counseling.

On 5 Mar 04, applicant received a Letter of Reprimand for failing to follow the orders of a noncommissioned officer (NCO), by not completing his homework.  

On 10 Jun 04, the squadron section commander initiated administrative discharge action against the applicant for entry-level performance and conduct.  The reasons for the proposed action were that applicant failed to make satisfactory progress in a required technical training program.  He was eliminated from the Fuels Apprentice training course for unsatisfactory performance after failing Block 1, Unit II test three times, with scores of 

52%, 52%, and 56% respectively, and objective 105a V1 with a score of 60%.  Minimum passing score was 72%.  Prior to disenrollment, applicant was counseled concerning his performance and received individualized assistance, and was washed back four times for additional instruction.  Efforts to improve his performance were unsuccessful.  

On that same date, after consulting with counsel, applicant waived his right to counsel and to submit statements in his own behalf.  On 17 Jun 04, the deputy staff judge advocate reviewed the case file and found it legally sufficient.  He concurred with the squadron section commander’s recommendation that the applicant be discharged with an entry level separation in accordance with AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airman, para 5.22 (entry level performance and conduct).  The discharge authority directed the applicant be discharged with an entry level separation.

On 18 Jun 04, applicant received an uncharacterized entry-level separation, by reason of “Entry Level Performance and Conduct,” and was issued an RE code of 2C.  He was credited with 5 months and 20 days of active duty service during this period.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPSOA reviewed this application and recommended denial, stating, in part, they found no evidence of error or injustice; nor did the applicant submit any evidence to support his claim.

HQ AFPC/DPSOA’s complete evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.  

HQ AFPC/DPSOS recommended denial of the applicant’s request.  They found the discharge consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  Additionally, the discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority.  The applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing and he provided no other facts warranting a change to his RE code.  

They also noted that 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 continuous service, it would be unfair to the member and the service to characterize their limited service.  

HQ AFPC/DPSOS’complete evaluation is at Exhibit D.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 21 Sep 2007 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office(Exhibit E).

___________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

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

2.  The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.  Applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, we are not persuaded that he 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 the circumstances of their separation.  Applicant’s RE code of 2C accurately reflects that he was involuntarily separated with an uncharacterized character of service and given the circumstances surrounding his separation, we believe the RE code issued was in accordance with the governing instruction.  Therefore, in the absence of persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2007-02404 in Executive Session on 4 December 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 Jul 07, w/atch. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSOA, dated 4 Sep 07, w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSOS, dated 6 Sep 07.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Sep 07.