RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  01-01917
		INDEX CODE:  110.02
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) Code of “2C” be changed so that he may reenlist in the Air Force.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His discharge could have been prevented if he would have been allowed to change his Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) prior to being sent to Air Force technical school.  

In support of his request, he submits a personal statement, a supportive statement from a community member and copies of his DD Form 214.  His complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force in the grade of airman basic (E-1) on 9 December 1998.  On 29 April 1999, applicant was notified by his commander that in accordance with AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5.22, he was recommending the applicant be discharged from the Air Force with an entry level separation.  The specific reason for the commander's action was that the applicant failed to make satisfactory progress in a required technical training program, Aircraft Electrical and Environmental Systems Apprentice Course.   

The applicant was advised of his rights in this matter.  The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification on that same date and the commander initiated discharge proceedings against the applicant on 29 April 1999.  After consulting counsel, the applicant waived his right to submit statements on his own behalf.

In a legal review of the discharge case file, the wing deputy staff judge advocate, found it legally sufficient and recommended that the applicant be discharged from the Air Force with an entry-level separation.  On 5 May 1999, the discharge authority directed that the applicant be discharged from the Air Force with an entry-level separation without probation and rehabilitation.  Accordingly, applicant was discharged on 6 May 1999 for “Entry Level Performance or Conduct” with an RE code of 2C, “Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service.”  He had served 4 months and 28 days on active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Separation Procedures Section, AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed the applicant's request and recommends denial.  DPPRS states that airmen are given entry-level separation/uncharacterized service characterization when separation is initiated in the first 180 days of continuous active serve.  The uncharacterized character of service is correct and in accordance with DoD and Air Force instructions due to the applicant’s limited service (see Exhibit C).

The Skills Management Branch, AFPC/DPPAE, reviewed applicant's request and states that the RE code of 2C, “Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service” is correct (see Exhibit D).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant responded and submits three letters of reference and again states his desire to reenlist in the Air Force.  His complete submission is at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

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 probable error or injustice.  We took note of the documentation the applicant provided in support of his request.  While his letters of recommendation indicate he is a respected citizen, we do not find them sufficiently persuasive to warrant approval of the requested relief.  Our finding in this regard is based on the fact that, according to the applicant, his difficulty adapting to the pressures of military life had its basis in his unsuccessful completion of a required training program.  In this regard, we are constrained to note that in considerations such as the career field in which a member serves, the needs of the Air Force are paramount.  While it appears he is comfortable in the less-stressful civilian environment, we have seen no evidence that the applicant would now be amenable to the demands of military life.  Therefore, in the absence of persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no basis upon which to favorably consider the requested relief. 

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of probable 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 this application in Executive Session on 31 October 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 1 July 2001 w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 26 July 2001.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 16 August 2001.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 24 August 2001.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated 26 August 2001 w/atchs.