RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-01254
            INDEX CODE:  112.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He would like his RE code changed to reenlist into another  branch  of
the service.   He  indicates  that  he  successfully  completed  basic
training, however, while in technical school for  Security  Forces  he
had difficulty passing the test for that career  field.   He  inquired
about cross training into another field but was told that was  not  an
option.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provided a personal statement,
a letter from the Army Recruiting Station, Waldorf, MD, dated 3  April
2002 and other documentation.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 19 June 2001 in the
grade of airman basic for a period of four (4) years.

On 24 October 2001 applicant was notified of his commander's intent to
initiate discharge action against him for entry level  performance  or
conduct.  The specific reason was as follows:

      You have failed to make  satisfactory  progress  in  a  required
training program.  Specifically, you were eliminated from the Security
Forces technical training course for academic deficiency after failing
the first written test three times with scores of 56%, 60%,  and  64%;
minimum  passing  is  70%.   Prior  to  your  disenrollment  you  were
counseled concerning  your  academic  failure  and  received  4  hours
Special  Individualized   Assistance.    Efforts   to   improve   your
performance have met with negative results.  As  a  result,  you  were
disenrolled from the Security Forces technical training course  on  18
October 2001.

On 25 October 2001, the Assistant  Staff  Judge  Advocate  recommended
that the applicant be separated from the service with an  Entry  Level
Separation.

On 29 October 2001, the applicant’s discharge was approved.

Applicant was discharged on 20 November 2001, in the grade  of  airman
basic with an Entry Level Performance and Conduct discharge, under the
provisions of AFI 36-3208.  He served a total of 5 months and  2  days
of total active military service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial.  They indicated  that  based  upon  the
documentation in the file, they believe the discharge  was  consistent
with the procedural and  substantive  requirements  of  the  discharge
regulation at that time.  Additionally, the discharge was  within  the
sound discretion of the discharge authority.  The  applicant  did  not
submit any new evidence or identify  and  errors  or  injustices  that
occurred in the discharge processing.   He  provided  no  other  facts
warranting a change in his discharge.  Accordingly, they recommend his
records remain the same.

The evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPAE recommended denial.  They indicated that the applicant  was
discharged on 20 November 2001, after serving five (5) months and  two
(2) days active service.  The Reenlistment Eligibility  (RE)  code  of
2C, “Involuntary separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level
separation without characterization of service” is correct.

The evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 2 August 2002, copies of the  evaluations  were  forwarded  to  the
applicant for review and response within thirty (30) days.  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 timely filed.

3.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of an error or an injustice warranting a change  in  the
applicant’s RE code.  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  and  adopt  their
rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant  has  not
been the victim of an error or injustice.   The  Board  believes  that
responsible officials applied appropriate standards in  effecting  the
separation, and the Board  does  not  find  persuasive  evidence  that
pertinent regulations were violated or that applicant was not afforded
all the rights to which entitled at the time of discharge.  Therefore,
in the absence of evidence to the  contrary,  we  find  no  compelling
basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

4.    Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented  to  demonstrate
the existence of an error or an injustice warranting a change  in  the
narrative reason for  separation.   After  reviewing  the  applicant’s
submission and the evidence of record,  we  are  persuaded  that  some
relief is warranted.  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 inaccurate.   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 THAT:

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, issued
on 20 November 2001.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number 02-
01254 in Executive Session on 25 September 2002, under the  provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. Lawrence R. Leehy, Panel Chair
                 Mr. E. David Hoard, Member
                 Ms. Diane Arnold, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 3 April 2002, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 4 June 2002.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 30 July 2002.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 2 August 2002.




                       LAWRENCE R. LEEHY
                       Panel Chair




AFBCMR 02-01254





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        , 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, issued
on 20 November 2001.





            JOE G. LINEBERGER
            Director
            Air Force Review Boards Agency