RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-02015
                                       INDEX CODE:  112.10
      XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX                COUNSEL: NONE

      XXXXXXXXXXXX                           HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed to enable her  to  explore
future enlistment possibilities with the Armed Forces.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

To her knowledge, the only reason she was discharged from the Air Force  was
because of her failure to pass an F-16 Fighter block  test.   Several  other
airmen who failed in this same manner  were  offered  the  option  of  being
reclassified into another career field.  She  feels  that  she  was  treated
unfairly because her only desire is to serve her Country.

In support of her application, the applicant provides copies  of  her  basic
military  training  performance  summary;  separation  orders;   commander’s
recommendation  for  discharge   with   acknowledgements;   DD   Form   214,
Certificate of Release  or  Discharge  From  Active  Duty;  and  letters  of
character   reference.    The   applicant’s   complete   submission,    with
attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 20 January 2004, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force  at  the
age of 23 in the grade of airman first class (E-3)  for  a  period  of  four
years.  On 8 March  2004,  following  her  successful  completion  of  basic
military training, the applicant was  enrolled  in  technical  training  for
aircraft maintenance.

On 19 May 2004, the applicant was  disenrolled  from  the  F-16  crew  chief
technical  training  course  for  consistently  failing  to  meet   academic
standards.  Prior to her disenrollment, the  applicant  had  been  counseled
for her academic failures, received seven hours  of  Special  Individualized
Assistance, attended the Academic Enrichment Program  and  was  washed  back
once.

On 7 June 2004, the applicant was notified by her commander  of  the  intent
to recommend her for discharge for failure to make satisfactory progress  in
a required training program.  The applicant was advised  of  her  rights  to
consult counsel and  to  submit  a  statement  in  her  own  behalf.   After
consulting counsel, she submitted a statement in her own behalf  along  with
character references.  On 10 June 2004, after  considering  her  submission,
the commander  recommended  the  applicant  be  discharged  for  entry-level
performance or conduct under the provisions of AFPD 36-32 and  AFI  36-3208,
paragraph 5.22.  In a legal review of the  discharge  case  file,  dated  15
June  2004,  the  deputy  staff  judge  advocate  found  the  file   legally
sufficient and indicated the discharge authority had the  option  to  either
retain the applicant on active duty or to discharge her with an  entry-level
separation.   On  17 June  2004,  the  discharge  authority   directed   the
applicant be promptly  discharged  under  the  provisions  of  AFI  36-3208,
paragraph 5.22, with an entry-level separation.

On 18 June 2004, the applicant was discharged with an uncharacterized Entry-
Level Separation because of entry-level performance with an RE  code  of  2C
and a separation code of JGA.  She had  served  4  months  and  29  days  on
active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  DPPRS states the  applicant’s  discharge  was
consistent  with  the  procedural  and  substantive  requirements   of   the
discharge regulation in affect at that time.   Additionally,  the  discharge
was within the discretion of the discharge  authority.   The  applicant  did
not provide any facts warranting a change in  her  reenlistment  eligibility
code, nor did she  submit  any  new  evidence  or  identify  any  errors  or
injustices that occurred in her discharge processing.  The DPPRS  evaluation
is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was  forwarded  to  the  applicant  on  6
August 2004, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D).  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 timely filed.

3.  Sufficient relevant evidence  has  been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of probable error or injustice.  After a thorough  review  of  the
applicant’s submission and the evidence of  record  we  are  persuaded  that
relief is warranted.   We  note  the  discharge  action  taken  against  the
applicant was in accordance with the applicable  instruction.   However,  we
are not convinced she was afforded a fair opportunity  to  cross-train  into
another career field more suitable to her capabilities  and  education.   In
addition, we find the  narrative  reason  for  her  entry-level  separation;
i.e., entry-level performance and conduct,  to  be  overly  harsh.   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 by deleting the words “and conduct”  from  her  narrative  reason
for separation.  In view of the  foregoing,  we  recommend  the  applicant’s
records be corrected as indicated below.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air  Force  relating
to APPLICANT  be  corrected  to  show  that  the  reentry  code,  issued  in
conjunction with her  entry  level  separation  on  18  June  2004,  was  3K
(reserved  for  use  by  HQ  AFPC  or  AFBCMR  when  no  other  reenlistment
eligibility code applies), and the  words  “and  conduct”  be  deleted  from
Block 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) on her DD Form  214,  Certificate
of Release or Discharge from Active Duty.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in  Executive
Session on 14 October 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

            Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
            Mr. John B. Hennessey, Member
            Mr. Alan A. Blomgren, Member


The following documentary evidence for AFBCMR  Docket  Number  BC-2004-02015
was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 21 Jun 04, with atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 2 Aug 04.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Aug 04.




                                  THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                  Chair


AFBCMR BC-2004-02015




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 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, be corrected to show that the reentry
code, issued in conjunction with her entry level separation on 18 June
2004, was 3K (reserved for use by
HQ AFPC or AFBCMR when no other reenlistment eligibility code applies), and
the words “and conduct” be deleted from Block 28 (Narrative Reason for
Separation) on her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from
Active Duty.





  JOE G. LINEBERGER

  Director

  Air Force Review Boards Agency