RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:				DOCKET NUMBER:  02-02492
INDEX CODE:  112.10
	XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX				COUNSEL: NONE

	XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX				HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed from 2C (involuntary separation with honorable discharge) to either 1 or 3C (first-term airman not yet considered under selective reenlistment program) to enable him to re-enter the USAF.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Since he did not go through basic training, he was not in the military long enough to earn a characterized discharge.  He should not have been given an RE Code of 2C which causes a waiting period before he reenlists.

The applicant provided no evidence in support of his appeal.  The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 17 April 2002, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force at the age of 19 in the grade of airman basic for a period of six years.  He was guaranteed a job in Security Forces.

On 22 April 2002, the applicant sought medical attention after experiencing difficulty breathing and a possible anxiety attack while participating in physical conditioning. It was discovered during his medical evaluation that the applicant had a history of psychiatric treatment for depression, anxiety, oppositional behavior and most recently, bipolar disorder.  When questioned about not identifying his medical history on his application into the military, he stated his recruiter told him not to put it down on his application and to mention it during his entrance physical.  The applicant claimed the MEPS liaison told him, “not to worry about it.”  On 23 April 2002, the attending Staff Psychologist recommended the applicant be discharged based on his current difficulties as well as his extensive psychiatric history of similar difficulties.  

On 15 May 2002, the applicant’s commander recommended the applicant’s discharge for defective enlistment. The applicant acknowledged receipt of the recommendation and waived his option to consult legal counsel and submit statements in his behalf.  On 17 May 2002, the recommendation was found to be legally sufficient by the Assistant Judge Advocate and approved by the discharge authority under the provisions of AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-3208, Chapter 5, Section 5c, Defective Enlistments, Paragraph 5.15, because of Fraudulent Entry.  The applicant was discharged effective 21 May 2002 with an uncharacterized entry-level separation with a separation code JDA (fraudulent entry into military service) and a reentry code of 2C (entry level separation without characterization of service).  He had served 1 month and 5 days on active duty but received no credit for this service based on the reason for his separation.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPAE reviewed the applicant’s case file and concludes that the RE code of 2C is correct.  The DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPRS reviewed the applicant’s case file and concurs that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 25 October 2002 for review and response.  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.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.  The applicant did not provide persuasive evidence showing the information in the discharge case was erroneous, his substantial rights were violated, or that his commanders abused their discretionary authority.  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.  In view of the foregoing, we conclude that no basis exists upon which to recommend favorable action on his request that it be changed.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of 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 6 February 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR Docket No. 02-02492:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 29 Jul 02, with attachments.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 26 Aug 02.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 16 Oct 02. 
	Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Oct 02.