RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01351
		INDEX CODE:  100.03

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED: NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed to one that would enable him to reenlist in the Air Force.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Since his discharge he has worked at several jobs where he has never been late nor has he had any problems.  He states that his previous flaws are no longer an issue and he misses the feeling of accomplishment being in the Air Force provided.

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

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 22 August 2000.  He attained the rank of Airman (Amn/E2) with a date of rank of 22 February 2001.  On 19 September 2001, the applicant failed his Career Development Course (CDC) test that would have enabled him to progress in his training level.  On 19 December 2001, the applicant failed his CDC retest.  On 30 November 2001, the applicant received a letter of reprimand (LOR) for intentionally misplacing an official document and for falsifying official orders.  Additionally, an Unfavorable Information File (UIF) was established.  He received a letter of counseling (LOC) on 17 October 2001 for being late for duty.  He received a Letter of Admonishment (LOA) on 18 October 2001, again for being late for duty.  On 30 January 2002, the applicant was given a LOC that was placed in his existing UIF.  On 2 April 2002 the applicant was notified that he was being recommended for discharge in accordance with Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-3208, Failure to Progress in On-The-Job Training.  The discharge was found legally sufficient on 12 April 2002.  The applicant exercised his right to consult counsel and to submit statements on his behalf.  He was honorably discharged, without Probation and Rehabilitation (P&R), on 19 April 2002 after serving for 1 year, 7 months, and 29 days.
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS reviewed this case and recommended denial.  DPPRS states that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and within the discretionary powers of the discharge authority.  No new evidence or any identification of error or injustice has been presented to warrant a change to the discharge.

DPPRS’s complete evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPAE has reviewed this case and verified that the RE code of 2C, “Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry-level separation without characterization of service” is correct.

DPPAE’s evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 23 May 2003 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

_________________________________________________________________

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 error or injustice.  After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant's submission, we are not persuaded that his contention of no longer being affected by “previous flaws”, in and by themselves, are sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air Force.  The brief amount of time between his discharge and his application, coupled with the fact that his previous commander felt he was a poor candidate for Probation and Rehabilitation (P&R), figured heavily in our decision.  Consequently, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of establishing that he has suffered either an error or injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

_________________________________________________________________

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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2003-01351 in Executive Session on 5 August 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 07 Apr 03, w/atchs. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 8 May 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 13 May 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 May 03.