RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00536 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be corrected as follows: a. Item 26 - Separation Code, which currently reflects “JHJ” (Unsuitability – Reasons Unknown/Unsatisfactory Performance) be changed to a more appropriate code. b. Item 27 - Reentry Code (RE), which currently reflects “2C” (Involuntarily separated with an Honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service.) be changed to reflect “1M” (Eligible to reenlist, Second Term or Career Airmen not yet considered under the SRP. (Do not separate Airman with this RE code)) to facilitate reentry into the service. c. Item 28 - Narrative Reason for Separation, which currently reads “Unsatisfactory Performance” be changed to a more appropriate reason. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His separation code “JHJ”, which reflects unsuitability due to unsatisfactory performance is unjust. His record does not reflect any bad performance. This code also attaches an unknown reason for discharge. He discovered that the components in question have caused delay, hindrance and potential disqualification for federal employment. His conduct while serving in the Air Force was honorable and at no time did he receive any derogatory paperwork like an Article 15 or Letter of Reprimand. There is no supportive data to reflect his performance was unsuitable. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 28 Jul 99. On 15 Feb 00, the applicant while in technical training failed to meet the minimum standard of 70% on a written test. He scored a 48%. He was directed to receive two hours of Specialized Individual Assistance (SIA) and scheduled to retake the test on 17 Feb 00. On 17 Feb 00, the applicant failed to meet the minimum standard of 70% on his second attempt. He scored a 42%. On 23 Feb 00, the applicant failed to meet the minimum standard of 70% on his third attempt. He scored a 52%. In preparation for this third test, the applicant received SIA every duty day at the rate of one hour per day, totaling four hours. As a result of the unsatisfactory performance, the applicant was dis- enrolled from technical training on 8 Mar 00. On 4 Apr 00, the applicant was notified by his commander he was recommending him for discharge for unsatisfactory performance under the provisions of AFPD 36-32, Military Retirements and Separations, and AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, Chapter 5, paragraph 5.26.1 with a recommendation for an Honorable discharge. On 14 Apr 00, the Staff Judge Advocate reviewed the discharge action and found it legally sufficient. The discharge authority approved the discharge with a service characterization of Honorable. He decided probation and rehabilitation was not appropriate in this case. On 20 Apr 00, the applicant was honorably discharged with a narrative reason for separation as “unsatisfactory performance and corresponding SPD code of “JHJ”. He was credited with 8 months and 20 days of active duty service. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandums prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibit C and D. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. The applicant was given every opportunity to improve his performance; however, he failed his exam three times. The applicant’s discharge to include the Separation Program Designator code, narrative reason for separation and character of service was appropriately administered and within the discretion of the discharge authority. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. The applicant’s current RE code “2C” accurately captures his involuntary discharge with an Honorable character of service. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 19 Sep 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). As of this date, no response has been received by this office. 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 an error or injustice with regard to the applicant’s Reentry Code. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of AFPC/DPSOA and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been a victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief. 4. Notwithstanding the decision above, the majority of the Board determined sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an injustice warranting a change in the applicant’s Narrative Reason for Separation and corresponding Separation Program Designation Code. After reviewing the applicant's submission and the evidence of record, the Board majority is persuaded that a measure of relief is warranted to more appropriately identify the circumstances surrounding his separation. Although we find the discharge action taken against the applicant was in accordance with the applicable instruction, we believe the narrative reason for his discharge; i.e., unsatisfactory performance, serves as an injustice. In that regard, we note there is no evidence that the applicant was afforded an opportunity to reclassify in much the same way other Airmen in this same career field are afforded as a result of academic failures. While we note AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial, we are persuaded by the applicant’s account that it would be an injustice for him to continue to suffer the adverse effects of his narrative reason for separation. Therefore, the Board majority recommends his records be corrected to show his narrative reason for separation with corresponding separation code as “Secretarial Authority.” THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show that his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, issued on 20 April 2000 be corrected to reflect a narrative reason for separation as Secretarial Authority and separation program designation code of JFF. The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-00536 in Executive Session on 10 Feb 2015 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member By unanimous vote, the Board members recommend denial to change the Reentry code. By a majority vote, the Board recommended to grant the Narrative Reason for Separation and Separation Code. Mr. XXXXXX recommends denial and submits a minority report at Exhibit F. The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-00536 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 5 Feb 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 20 Mar 14. Exhibit D. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 14 May 14. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Sep 14. Exhibit F. Minority Report, dated 25 Feb 15.