RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 				DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02702

      COUNSEL:  NONE

							HEARING DESIRED:  NO



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active 
Duty, be amended to correct the following errors:

1.  Separation Program Designator (SPD) Code of “JGA” (Entry Level 
Performance) be changed.

2.  Date of separation (DOS) of 27 Aug 90 be corrected.

3.  Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of “2C” be changed.

4.  Recognition for participating in the basic training marching 
band be documented.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her SPD code of “JGA” alludes to pregnancy, which is an untrue 
fact.  She was separated for failing dental school, not for 
pregnancy.  Her RE code of “2C” is wrong because she was told she 
would be able to reenlist if she so elected to do so later in 
life.  Her separation date is incorrect because she was on hold at 
her technical training base until October of 1990.  Finally, her 
record does not acknowledge her participation in the basic 
training marching band.

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant entered the Regular Air Force on 23 Mar 90.

On 6 Aug 90, according to the ATC Form 125A, Record of 
Administrative Training Action, the applicant was not recommended 
for retention due to lack of motivation to complete her
         training course.

On 17 Aug 90, the applicant was recommended for discharge for 
failure to make satisfactory progress in her required training 
program.

On 27 Aug 90, according to the AF Form 100, Request and 
Authorization for Separation, the effective date of the 
applicant’s separation was 27 Aug 90.

On 27 Aug 90, the applicant was furnished an entry level 
separation, with an uncharacterized character of service, for 
entry level performance, with an SPD code of JGA and an RE code of 
2C, and was credited with five months, and five days of active 
service.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the memoranda prepared by the Air Force offices of 
primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibits C, D, 
and E.


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an 
error or an injustice in the applicant’s SPD code or DOS.  The 
applicant’s record documents her commander notified her he was 
recommending her for discharge for “Entry Level Performance or 
Conduct” - failure to make satisfactory progress in a required 
training program (not for pregnancy, as the applicant contends) on 
17 Aug 90 and that the applicant acknowledged receipt of this 
notification by placing her signature on the memorandum which is 
also dated 17 Aug 90.  Additionally, there is documentation in the 
record to show that the base separations authority directed entry 
level separation for her via a memorandum dated 24 Aug 90.  Once 
the base separations authority approved the applicant for 
involuntary separation, discharge was consummated within days of 
approval.  All other written documentation (AF FM 100, AF Form 
330, AF Form 2587, and DD Form 214) located in the applicant's 
master personnel record shows an effective DOS as 27 Aug 90.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an 
error or an injustice regarding the applicant’s RE code.  The 
applicant received an Entry Level Separation on 27 Aug 90 with an 
uncharacterized character of service and a narrative reason for 
separation of “Entry Level Performance.”  On 24 Aug 1990, the 
appropriate authority approved her discharge with an entry level 
separation.  The applicant received an RE code of 2C--
(Involuntarily separated under AFR 39-10 with an honorable 
discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of 
service) based on her entry level separation with uncharacterized 
character of service.  The applicant provides no evidence she was 
told she could reenter the Air Force at any time after separation.  
If the Board chooses to grant the applicant’s request to change 
the RE code, “4G (No career field awarded that is commensurate 
with grade)” is the best available code that applies in her 
situation.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D.

AFPC/DPSID recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an 
error or an injustice to award recognition for participating in a 
basic training marching band.  After a review of the applicant’s 
record, there is no evidence the applicant was awarded a 
decoration for participating in the basic training marching band, 
nor did the applicant provide any.  Further, no official award of 
the Air Force or Department of Defense authorized for serving as a 
member of a marching band; basic training or otherwise exists.  To 
grant relief would be contrary to criteria established by 
DoDM 1348.33, Secretary of the Air Force, Chief of Staff, and/or 
the War Department.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit E.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the 
applicant on 16 Mar 15 for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit D).  As of this date, no response has been received by 
this office.


FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD:

After careful consideration of applicant’s request and the 
available evidence of record, we find the application untimely.  
Applicant did not file within three years after the alleged error 
or injustice was discovered as required by Title 10, United States 
Code, Section 1552 and Air Force Instruction 36-2603.  Applicant 
has not shown a plausible reason for the delay in filing, and we 
are not persuaded that the record raises issues of error or 
injustice which require resolution on the merits.  Thus, we cannot 
conclude it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the 
applicant’s failure to file in a timely manner.


THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The application was not timely filed and it would not be in the 
interest of justice to waive the untimeliness.  It is the decision 
of the Board, therefore, to reject the application as untimely.


The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number 
BC-2014-02702 in Executive Session on 21 May 15 under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	 , Panel Chair
	 , Member
	 , Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 30 Jun 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 17 Dec 14.
	Exhibit D.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 22 Jan 15.
      Exhibit E.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSID, dated 16 Mar 15.
	Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Apr 15.