RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-02639
            INDEX CODE:  100.06, 110.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed so that he can  enlist  in
the Navy.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His RE code prevents him from  reentering  any  of  the  Armed  Forces.   He
entered the military at the age of 18.  He separated for reasons he  thought
were right at the time and now realizes they were extremely foolish.  He  is
now 27 years old, and has grown more  mentally  and  physically  since  that
time.  If his code is changed he  will  be  able  to  provide  a  safer  and
stronger future for his wife and three children.   If  he  can  enlist  once
again, he would be able to achieve the dream of being a shining  example  to
his family and friends like he had once intended.

In support of his request, applicant provided his personal statement  and  a
copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release  or  Discharge  from  Active
Duty.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 2 Sep 98,  in  the  grade  of
airman basic (E-1), for a period of four years, as an Aerospace  Maintenance
Apprentice.

On 19 Feb 99, applicant was notified of his commander’s intent to  recommend
him for an entry-level separation for failure to make satisfactory  progress
in a required training program.  Specifically,  applicant  failed  Block  II
exam,  and  Block  III  exam  twice  with  scores  of  48%,  66%,  and   60%
respectively—minimum  passing  score  is  70%.   Efforts  to   improve   his
performance were met with negative  results.   As  a  result  applicant  was
disenrolled from his technical training on 18 Feb 99.

On 19  Feb  99,  applicant  acknowledged  receipt  of  the  notification  of
discharge and waived his right to consult with legal counsel and  to  submit
statements in his  own  behalf.   On  1  Mar  99,  the  discharge  authority
directed an entry-level separation.

On 3 Mar 99, applicant received an uncharacterized  entry-level  separation,
by reason of entry level performance and conduct, and was issued an RE  code
of 2C (Entry-level separation  without  characterization  of  service).   He
served on active duty for a period of six months and two days.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPSOS recommends the application be denied,  and  states,  in  part,
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.

Applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors  or  injustices
that occurred in the discharge processing.  He provided no facts  warranting
a change to his reenlistment eligibility code.

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 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 DPSOS complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 2 Nov 07, a copy of  the  Air  Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant for review and comment within 30 days.  To date,  a  response  has
not been received.

_________________________________________________________________

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.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of error or injustice concerning the  applicant’s  RE  code.   The
applicant has provided no evidence showing that his assigned RE code  is  in
error or contrary to the prevailing instruction.   The  RE  code  which  was
issued at  the  time  of  applicant’s  separation  accurately  reflects  the
circumstances of his separation and we do not find this code to be in  error
or unjust.  We, therefore, conclude that  no  basis  exists  upon  which  to
recommend favorable action on his request that it be changed.

4.  Notwithstanding the above, 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 unjust.  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 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 3 March 1999.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number  BC-2007-
02639 in Executive Session on 21 Dec 07, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

      Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
      Ms. Audrey Y. Davis, Member
      Ms. Patricia R. Collins, Member

All members voted to correct the records,  as  recommended.   The  following
documentary evidence pertaining to  Docket  Number        BC-2007-02639  was
considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 Aug 07, w/atch.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 25 Sep 07.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 2 Nov 07.





                                   CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
                                   Panel Chair


AFBCMR BC-2007-02639



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 3 March
1999.




            JOE G. LINEBERGER
            Director
            Air Force Review Boards Agency