RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-03251
            INDEX CODE:  112.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) and separation codes be changed.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She would like her RE code changed to enlist into the  Air  Force  Reserves.
She indicates that she completed basic training and was in  the  ninth  week
of the eleven-week security forces training program.  She failed  a  section
test three times and was notified that she would not be allowed to  continue
training because of academic deficiency.  She was informed  that  she  could
leave the Air Force and re-enter in six months or she could wait  in  detail
status for several months until she  could  be  reassigned  to  a  different
skill.  It was implied to her that the best option was  to  take  an  entry-
level separation and then reenter the Air Force in six  months.   She  chose
the option to separate and declined counsel.  She understands that  she  was
separated  for  academic  deficiencies  relative  to  the  security  forces;
however, she is qualified for duty in a different Air Force  Specialty  Code
(AFSC) and intends to enter the Reserves when the  correction  requested  is
made.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 22 January  2002  in  the
grade of airman basic for a period of four years.

On 28 May 2002 the applicant was  notified  of  her  commander's  intent  to
initiate  discharge  action  against  her  for  entry-level  performance  or
conduct.  The specific reason was as follows:

      On 21 May 2002, she failed Test  1  Version  A  with  a  score  of  68
percent.  The minimum passing score  was  70  percent.   As  a  result,  she
received an AETC Form 173, dated 21 March 2002.

      On 22 March 2002, she failed to qualify on the M9 handgun,  scoring  a
21.  The minimum score to qualify was 28.  As  a  result,  she  received  an
AETC Form 173, dated 22 March 2002.


      On 25 March 2002, she failed to qualify on the M9 handgun,  scoring  a
22.  The minimum score to qualify was 28.  As  a  result,  she  received  an
AETC Form 173, dated 25 March 2002.


      On 26 March 2002, she failed to qualify on the M16 four times, scoring
12, 11, 14, and 17 respectively.  The minimum score to qualify was  25.   As
a result, she received an AETC Form 173, dated 26 March 2002.


      On 3 May 2002, she failed Test  4  Version  1B  with  a  score  of  55
percent.  The minimum passing score  was  70  percent.   As  a  result,  she
received an AETC Form 173, dated 3 May 2002.


      On 7 May 2002, she failed her re-test of Test  4  Version  1A  with  a
score of 60 percent.  As a result, she received an AETC Form  173,  dated  7
May 2002.

On 28 May 2002, the applicant waived her right  to  counsel  and  to  submit
statements in her behalf.

Applicant was discharged on 7 June 2002, in the grade of airman  basic  with
an uncharacterized discharge, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-3208.   The
narrative reason for the discharge was Entry Level Performance and  Conduct.
 She served 4 months and 16 days of  total  active  military  service.   She
received an RE code of  2C  -  Involuntarily  separated  with  an  honorable
discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRSP  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.
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.  She  provided  no  other  facts  warranting  a  change  in  her
discharge.

The evaluation is at Exhibit C.


EXAMINER’S NOTE:  Applicant does not contest the accuracy  of  the  RE  code
and after reviewing the applicable instruction, AFI 36-2606, it appears  the
RE code is correct.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 7 November 2003, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to  the
applicant for review and response within 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.    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  and  Reenlistment  Eligibility  (RE)  code.   After
reviewing the applicant’s submission and the  evidence  of  record,  we  are
persuaded that 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  her  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 her  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,  her  narrative  reason  for
separation should be corrected to accurately reflect  the  circumstances  of
her separation.  In view of the  foregoing,  we  recommend  the  applicant’s
records be corrected by deleting the words “and conduct” from her  narrative
reason for separation.

4.    The RE code issued at the time of separation was  in  accordance  with
the applicable regulations.  However, the Board  finds  that  based  on  the
applicant’s desire to reenlist  in  the  service,  her  RE  code  should  be
changed to “3K.”  The Board believes she should be afforded the  opportunity
to apply for a waiver to enlist in the armed services.  Whether or  not  she
is  successful  will  depend  on  the  needs  of   the   service   and   our
recommendation in no way guarantees that she will be allowed  to  return  to
the Air Force or any branch of the service.  Therefore, we recommend her  RE
code be changed to “3K” (Secretarial Authority).

_________________________________________________________________

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 her  DD  Form  214,  Certificate  of
Release or Discharge from Active Duty, issued on 7 June  2002  and  to  show
that at the time of  her  discharge  on  7  June  2002,  she  was  issued  a
Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of “3K.”

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number  BC-2003-
03251 in Executive Session on 11 December 2003, under the provisions of  AFI
36-2603:

                 Ms. Marilyn Thomas, Vice Chair
                 Ms. Martha Maust, Member
                 Mr. Albert Ellett, Member

All members voted to correct the records,  as  recommended.   The  following
documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 23 September 2003, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRSP, dated 22 October 2003.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 November 2003.





                       MARILYN THOMAS
                       Vice Chair




AFBCMR BC-2003-03251





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 her DD Form 214, Certificate of
Release or Discharge from Active Duty, issued on 7 June 2002 and to show
that at the time of her discharge on 7 June 2002, she was issued a
Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of “3K.”





            JOE G. LINEBERGER
            Director
            Air Force Review Boards Agency