RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-03952
            INDEX CODE:  110.02

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Item 11 on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or  Discharge  from
Active Duty, be changed to reflect an Air Force Specialty Code  (AFSC)
of 2T071 rather than 2T051.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His AFSC skill level was a  7  level  when  he  left  the  Air  Force.
Somehow his DD Form 214 was  changed  to  reflect  a  skill  level  of
5 instead of 7.  Now that he is in the Air National  Guard  (ANG)  and
wants to be promoted, he needs the skill level on his DD Form  214  to
be changed to reflect the 7 level.  He is concerned his career may end
if this change is not made.  Further, he has  presented  documentation
showing he was in a 7-skill level prior to his discharge from the  Air
Force.

In support of his appeal, the applicant has provided copies of his  DD
Form  214,  his  National  Guard  Bureau  (NGB)  Form  22,  Report  of
Separation  and  Record   of   Service,   and   an   AF   Form   2096,
Classification/On-The-Job Training Action.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 8 June 1993 and was
progressively promoted to the grade of staff sergeant. On 24  November
1999, the applicant was enrolled in Career  Development  Course  (CDC)
number 2T071.  He failed to progress in on-the-job training  (OJT)  by
twice failing to obtain a minimum passing score on the  2T071  end-of-
course examination (1 November 2000 and 19  December  2000).   He  was
withdrawn from training on 12 January  2001  per  AF  Form  2096.   He
signed the AF Form 2096 concurring and acknowledging understanding  of
his ineligibility for promotion, reenlistment, and reassignment  while
withdrawn from training, and that removal from  upgrade  training  may
result in separation under the provisions  of  Air  Force  Instruction
(AFI) 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen.  On 25 April 2001,
his  commander  recommended  he  be  discharged   for   Unsatisfactory
Performance, Failure to Progress in Training.  He signed a conditional
waiver indicating his desire to accept an honorable discharge in  lieu
of an administrative discharge board.  The discharge action was  found
legally sufficient on 26 April 2001 and  his  commander  accepted  his
conditional waiver request on  30 April  2001.   He  was  subsequently
separated with an honorable discharge on 14 May 2001.  He was  serving
in the grade of staff sergeant and had served 7 years, 11 months,  and
8 days at the time of his separation.  He served in the  Oklahoma  ANG
(OKANG) from 28 March 2002 until 7  April  2004  when  he  joined  the
Arkansas ANG (ARANG). He has over three years of satisfactory  Reserve
service and over 11 years of combined active and Reserve  service  for
pay.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPAC recommends denial.  DPPAC  contends  the  documents  the
applicant provides do not substantiate his claim that item 11  of  his
DD form 214 does not accurately reflect the AFSC skill level in  which
he performed while on active duty.  Although the AF Form 2096, dated 8
April 2004, provided by the applicant appears to document his  primary
AFSC as 2T071 effective 12 April 2001 (prior to  his  separation  from
active duty), this action contradicts the  basis  upon  which  he  was
discharged on 14 May 2001, failure to  successfully  pass  CDC  number
2T071.

DPPAC’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant  contends  he  had  his   personnel   record   changed   via
congressional action to reflect an  AFSC  of  2T071.   He  states  the
change was made and he is now asking that his DD Form 214  be  changed
to reflect the same skill level.

The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

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  error  or  injustice.   We  took  notice  of   the
applicant's complete submission in judging the  merits  of  the  case;
however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force
office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the  basis
for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the  victim  of  an
error or injustice.  While he contends he had  the  AFSC  changed  via
congressional action, he has provided no documentation  to  show  this
ever took place.  Further, and notwithstanding his inclusion of an  AF
Form 2096 indicating his AFSC at the 7-level,  his  discharge  package
reveals he was separated for not progressing in  training  to  the  7-
level and in fact had failed the test that would have conferred the 7-
level twice within a two-month period.  Therefore, in the  absence  of
evidence to the contrary, we find no  compelling  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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2005-03952 in Executive Session on 28 March 2006, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Jay H. Jordan, Panel Chair
      Ms. Renee M. Collier, Member
      Ms. Josephine L. Davis, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 21 Dec 05, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAC, dated 7 Feb 06.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Feb 06.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, APPLICANT, undated, w/atchs.



                                   JAY H. JORDAN
                                   Panel Chair