RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-02193
                                       INDEX CODE:  112.10
      XXXXXXXXXXXXXX                    COUNSEL: NONE

                                             HEARING DESIRED:  NO


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  24 January 2008


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be changed to reflect a different reenlistment eligibility  (RE)
code to enable him to join the Air National Guard.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was told his separation was due to academics.  He was never in  any  kind
of trouble and his conduct never needed reprimand.  He always  followed  the
rules and took remedial classes during  his  personal  time  to  better  his
grades.  He was not given the opportunity to reclassify into another  career
field.  He has been denied entry into the Air National Guard due to  his  RE
code of 2C, (involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge).

In support of his application, the applicant provides a  personal  statement
and copies of his DD Form 214, Certificate  of  Release  or  Discharge  from
Active  Duty;  discharge  notification  and   order;   student   record   of
academic/nonacademic counseling and comments; and application for review  of
discharge.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 21 March 2006, the applicant enlisted in the Regular  Air  Force  at  the
age of 20 in the grade of airman basic (E-1) for  a  period  of  six  years.
Following basic training,  the  applicant  attended  technical  training  to
become a Tactical Aircraft Maintenance Helper.

On 13 June 2006, the applicant was disenrolled from technical  training  for
academic  deficiency.   The  Record  of   Administrative   Training   Action
indicates  the  grounds  for  disenrollment  were  for  factors  under   the
applicant’s control and he should not be considered  for  further  technical
training.  His commander stated the applicant’s  poor  academic  performance
clearly showed he would not be able to become a  productive  member  of  the
Air Force.  The commander recommended the applicant be eliminated  from  the
F-16 crew chief course and discharged from the Air Force.

On 22 June 2006, his commander notified the  applicant  that  he  was  being
recommended for discharge from the Air  Force  for  entry-level  performance
and conduct.  The applicant acknowledged receipt and  waived  his  right  to
consult counsel and to submit statements  in  his  own  behalf.   The  Staff
Judge Advocate found the  case  legally  sufficient  on  28  June  2006  and
recommended the applicant be discharged with an entry-level separation.   On
30 June 2006, the discharge authority approved the separation  and  directed
the applicant be separated with an  uncharacterized  entry-level  separation
under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5.22.

The applicant was separated effective 5 July 2006  with  an  uncharacterized
discharge, a separation code of JGA (entry-level performance  and  conduct),
and a  reentry  code  of  2C  (involuntarily  separated  with  an  honorable
discharge).  He served 3 months, and 15 days of active duty.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ARPC/DPPRS recommends the applicant’s request be denied.  DPPRS  states  his
commander notified the applicant he was recommending his discharge from  the
Air Force for entry-level  performance  and  conduct.   The  basis  for  the
commander’s recommendation was the applicant’s failure to make  satisfactory
progress in  a  required  training  program.   Specifically,  the  applicant
failed Block 1; Unit 12, Test A, three times with scores of  66%,  58%,  and
56% respectively.  The minimum passing score  is  70%.   The  applicant  was
disenrolled from the technical training course on 13 June  2006.   Prior  to
his  disenrollment,  he  was  counseled  concerning  his  academic  failure;
received 16 hours  special  individualized  assistance;  and  attended  Wing
Learning  Development  Center  Study  Skills,  Test  Anxiety,  and   Reading
Comprehension courses.  Efforts to improve his  performance  were  met  with
negative results.

DPPRS states based on the documentation in  the  master  personnel  records,
the  discharge  was  consistent  with   the   procedural   and   substantive
requirements  of  the  discharge  regulation  and  was  within   the   sound
discretion of the discharge authority.  The applicant did  not  provide  any
evidence  or  identify  any  errors  or  injustices  that  occurred  in  the
discharge process.

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  8
September 2006 for review and response 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 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
some relief is warranted.  We note the discharge action  taken  against  the
applicant  and  the  characterization  of  service  he  was  given  were  in
accordance with the applicable instruction.  However, 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 by  deleting  the  words  “and  conduct”
from his narrative reason for separation.   Insufficient  relevant  evidence
has been presented  to  demonstrate  the  existence  of  probable  error  or
injustice in regard to the applicant’s RE code.  We find the RE  code  which
was issued at the time of the  applicant’s  separation  accurately  reflects
the circumstances of his separation and we do not find this code  to  be  in
error or unjust.  Therefore, we conclude that no basis exists upon which  to
recommend favorable action on his request that it be changed.   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 words “and  conduct”  be  deleted
from Block 28  (Narrative  Reason  for  Separation)  on  his  DD  Form  214,
Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in  Executive
Session on 31 October 2006, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

            Ms. Martha J. Evans, Panel Chair
            Mr. Wallace F. Beard, Jr., Member
            Ms. Jan Mulligan, Member


All members voted to correct the records,  as  recommended.   The  following
documentary evidence for AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2006-02193 was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 14 Jul 06, with atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 28 Aug 06.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Sep 06.




                                  MARTHA J. EVANS
                                  Panel Chair


AFBCMR BC-2006-02193




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 words
“and conduct” be deleted from Block 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation)
on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty.





  JOE G. LINEBERGER

  Director

  Air Force Review Boards Agency