RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-00322
            INDEX CODE:  110.02
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reason for separation be changed so that he may qualify  for  Montgomery
GI Bill (MGIB) benefits.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His DD Form 214, Certificate of  Release  or  Discharge  from  Active  Duty,
should state that he was discharged at the request  of  the  government  for
not passing the Career Development Courses (CDCs) due to a  lack  of  proper
training.  His complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted  in  the  Regular  Air  Force  on  16  Jun  99.   He  was
progressively promoted to the grade of airman first  class,  having  assumed
that grade effective and with a date of rank of 6 Dec 01.   On  22  Feb  02,
applicant was notified by his commander that he was recommending that he  be
discharged from the Air Force in accordance with  AFPD  36-32  and  AFI  36-
3208, paragraph 5.26.3.  The specific reason for this action was  on  2  Nov
00, he failed his end-of-course (EOC) examination with a score of  64%.   He
was allowed to retest, and on 2 Feb 01, he failed the EOC examination  again
with a score of 64%.  He was advised  of  his  rights  in  this  matter  and
acknowledged  receipt  of  the  notification  on  that  same  date.    After
consulting counsel, applicant elected not to submit statements  on  his  own
behalf.  In a legal review of the  case,  the  wing  staff  judge  advocate,
found the case legally sufficient and  recommended  that  he  be  discharged
with an honorable discharge, without probation and  rehabilitation.   On  22
Mar 02, the  discharge  authority  concurred  with  the  recommendation  and
directed  that  he  be  discharged  without  probation  and  rehabilitation.
Applicant was discharged from the Air Force on  29  Mar  02.   He  served  2
years, 9 months, and 14 days on active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPAT states that the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) under  Title
38 USC may grant education benefits to a veteran if he or  she  receives  an
honorable discharge and serves a particular amount of active duty.  The  DVA
may grant benefits to  veterans  discharged  for  the  same  reason  as  the
applicant if they serve full terms of obligated active duty.  The  DVA  will
not award benefits to the applicant because his  discharge  reason  requires
that he serve a full term of active duty.  The  applicant  may  qualify  for
benefits if the discharge reason is changed  to  one  that  allows  benefits
after service of at least 30 months of active duty.

The DPPAT evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  DPPRS states  that  the  applicant's  records
clearly indicate he was afforded the necessary time and additional  training
prior to disenrollment.  He failed the EOC examinations with scores  of  64%
on both.  His commander considered the possibility of  retraining,  but  the
applicant's duty performance was substandard and his  personal  interactions
within his work center were problematic.  He was recommended  for  discharge
because of his behavioral problems, failure to respond to  extra  one-on-one
training for failure to put forth the effort required for improvement.   His
discharge was consistent with the procedural  and  substantive  requirements
of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of  the  discharge
authority.  He did not submit any new evidence or identify any  errors  that
occurred in the discharge processing.  The DPPRS evaluation  is  at  Exhibit
D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the  applicant  on  21
Mar 03 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this  office
has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

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  that  would  warrant  changing  the
applicant's narrative reason for separation.  After  a  thorough  review  of
the evidence of record, we find no error in this case and are not  persuaded
by his contentions that he has been the victim of an injustice.  It  is  our
opinion that the actions to affect his discharge from  the  Air  Force  were
proper, in compliance with the provisions of regulations in  effect  at  the
time, and were the  direct  result  of  his  inability  to  meet  Air  Force
training standards.  We agree with the opinions and recommendations  of  the
Air Force offices of primary responsibility and  adopt  their  rationale  as
the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the  victim  of
an error or injustice.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we  find
no 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  Docket  Number  BC-2003-00322
in Executive Session on 29 May 03, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Wayne R. Gracie, Panel Chair
      Mr. George Franklin, Member
      Mrs. Carolyn J. Watkins-Taylor, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 26 Jan 03.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAT, dated 6 Mar 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 11 Mar 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Mar 03.




                                   WAYNE R. GRACIE
                                   Panel Chair