RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

      IN THE MATTER OF:            DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-01615
            INDEX CODE: 112.10
      XXXXXXX                     COUNSEL:  NONE
                                   HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 25 NOVEMBER 2008

______________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  His reenlistment (RE) code be changed so he can enlist  in  the  United
States Navy (USN).

2.  The applicant makes comment that he believes he  was  paying  into  the
Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) but makes no specific request for relief.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was discharged because of too  many  course  failures  during  technical
school.  He believes this was an injustice because during technical school,
he was concerned about his mother who had suddenly become  ill;  therefore,
he was not able to give his undivided attention to his training.  Now  that
he is much older and mature, he now realizes he  should  not  have  allowed
this to affect his training to the degree it did.  It is his desire to join
the USN and serve his country.

In support of his request, the applicant submits a personal letter.

His complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Air Force on  30  August  2005  in  the  grade  of
airman basic.  On 11 January 2006, applicant was notified by  his  commander
that he was recommending he be discharged  from  the  Air  Force  under  the
provisions of AFI 3208, Administrative  Separation  of  Airman  (entry-level
performance and conduct), with an  uncharacterized  entry-level  separation.
The specific reasons for this action were his failure of  Block  1,  Test  A
twice and Block II, Test A, with scores of 68%, 68% and  66%,  respectively.
The minimum passing score was 70%.  As a result of these  failures,  he  was
disenrolled from training.

He acknowledged receipt of the notification  of  discharge  and  waived  his
right to consult counsel and submit statements on  his  own  behalf.   In  a
legal review of his case, the base legal office found it legally  sufficient
to support separation and recommended he be discharged with  an  entry-level
separation.

Applicant was discharged in the grade of  airman  basic  on  26 August  2006
with an uncharacterized entry-level separation.

He received an RE code of “2C” which denotes "Involuntarily separated with
an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization
of service."

He served 4 months and 26 days on active duty.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  DPPRS states airmen  are  given  entry-level
separation/uncharacterized  service  characterization  when  separation  is
initiated in  the  first  180  days  of  continuous  active  service.   The
Department of Defense (DoD) determined if a member  served  less  than  180
days of 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.  The applicant did not identify any  errors  or
injustices that  occurred  in  the  discharge  process.   Additionally,  he
provided no facts warranting a change in his RE code  or  narrative  reason
for separation.

The complete DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPAT states the applicant makes the statement "I believe I was paying
into the G.I. Bill." but does not provide a clear explanation regarding his
request.   The  applicant  contributed  $400.00  of  the  required   $1,200
contribution for participation in the MGIB program prior to his separation.
 In addition, the applicant  was  asked  to  identify  what  the  error  or
injustice was regarding his belief that he was paying into the  MGIB.   The
applicant provided no response.  DPPAT can confirm that  he  did  begin  to
contribute toward the MGIB; however, since the applicant does  not  clarify
his statement, DPPAT cannot provide a recommendation.

The complete DPPAT evaluation is at Exhibit D.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the  applicant  on  3
August 2007 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this  date,  this
office has received no response (Exhibit E).

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by  existing  law  or
regulations.

2.  The application was time filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of an error or injustice regarding the applicant’s  RE  code  and
enrollment in the  MGIB.   We  took  notice  of  the  applicant’s  complete
submission in judging the merits of the case, however; we  agree  with  the
opinions  and  recommendations  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.  Therefore,
in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis  to
recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

4. Notwithstanding the above, we believe relief is warranted  with  respect
to the applicant's narrative reason  for  separation.   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
inappropriate.  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.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS:

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.

________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered  Docket  Number  BC-2007-01615
in Executive Session on 12 September 2007, under the provisions of  AFI  36-
2603:

                 Mr. Michael J. Novel, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Richard K. Hartley, Member
                 Mr. Reginald P. Howard, Member

All members voted to correct the records, as  recommended.   The  following
documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number  BC-2007-01615  was
considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated May 17, 2007, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  AFPC/DPPRS Letter, dated 8 June 2007.
    Exhibit D.  AFPC/DPPAT Letter, dated 24 Jul 2007.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 August 2007.






                                             MICHAEL J. NOVEL
                             Panel Chair



                         DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
                                WASHINGTON DC



[pic]



Office of the Assistant Secretary

AFBCMR BC-2007-01615




MEMORANDUM FOR 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 XXXXXXX, XXXXXXX, 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.




                                                       JOE G. LINEBERGER
                                                             Director
                                                 Air Force Review Boards
Agency