RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-02801
            INDEX CODE:  110.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  13 March 2007

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His uncharacterized character of service be changed to honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He did not perform any dishonorable service  while  in  the  military.
His failure to meet a requirement for the specific occupation  he  was
trained for caused his separation and resulted in  an  uncharacterized
separation which might hinder his future career opportunity.

In support of the appeal, applicant submits two copies of his DD  Form
214.  Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit
A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 27 June 2001.

On 12 October 2001, the applicant was notified by the  commander  that
he was recommending him for discharge from the  Air  Force  for  Entry
Level Performance or Conduct.  The reason  for  this  action  was  his
failure to make satisfactory progress in a required training  program.
The applicant  was  eliminated  from  the  Security  Forces  technical
training course for  academic  deficiency  after  failing  the  second
written test three times with scores of 68%,  68%,  and  56%,  minimum
passing is 70%.  Prior to applicant’s disenrollment, he was  counseled
concerning his academic failure and received eight  hours  of  Special
Individualized  Assistance.   Applicant’s  efforts  to   improve   his
performance have met with negative  results.   As  a  result,  he  was
disenrolled from the Security Forces technical training  course  on  3
October 2001.  Applicant acknowledged receipt of the  notification  of
discharge and waived his rights to  consult  with  legal  counsel  and
submit statements in his own behalf.  The base legal office found  the
case legally sufficient to support the separation with an  entry-level
separation.  The  discharge  authority  approved  the  separation  and
directed that the applicant be separated with an uncharacterized entry-
level separation.

The applicant was separated from the Air  Force  on  25  October  2001
under the provisions of  AFI  36-3208,  Administrative  Separation  of
Airmen (entry-level performance and conduct), with an  uncharacterized
entry-level separation.  He had served 3 months and 28 days on  active
duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS states, based on the documentation on file  in  the  master
personnel records, the discharge was consistent  with  the  procedural
and  substantive  requirements  of  the  discharge  regulation.    The
discharge was  within  the  discretion  of  the  discharge  authority.
Therefore, they recommend denial of applicant’s request.

Airmen  are  given  entry-level   separation/uncharacterized   service
characterization when separation is initiated in the  first  180  days
continuous active service.  The Department of Defense (DoD) determined
if a member served less than 180 days continuous  active  service,  it
would be unfair to the member and the service  to  characterize  their
limited service.  Therefore, his uncharacterized character of  service
is correct and in accordance with DoD and Air Force instructions.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 14 October 2005, 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 not  timely  filed;  however,  it  is  in  the
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

3.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence  of  injustice  warranting  a  change  in  the  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 overly harsh.  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.
Notwithstanding the above findings, the  applicant’s  request  for  an
honorable discharge was considered; however, based on  the  regulatory
criteria regarding  members  whose  separation  action  was  initiated
within 180 days of entry  and  in  the  absence  of  evidence  by  the
applicant showing his separation with an uncharacterized  entry  level
separation was erroneous or unjust, that portion of the application is
not favorably considered.

________________________________________________________________

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  25
October 2001.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the  Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 6 December 2005, under the provisions of AFI  36-
2603:

                  Mr. Michael V. Barbino, Panel Chair
                  Ms. Janel I. Hassan, Member
              Ms. LeLoy W. Cottrell, Member







All members  voted  to  correct  the  records,  as  recommended.   The
following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number  BC-
2005-02801 was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 3 Oct 05, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 11 Oct 05.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Oct 05.




                                   MICHAEL V. BARBINO
                                   Panel Chair







AFBCMR BC-2005-02801





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 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 25 October 2001.






                             JOE G. LINEBERGER
                             Director
                             Air Force Review Boards Agency