RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01539
		INDEX NUMBER: 100.00

	 	COUNSEL:  NONE

	 	HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed to allow his reenlistment.

_________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The medical diagnosis of his condition was incorrect.
In support of the appeal, applicant submits a radiographic examination from Lemoore Naval Hospital.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 14 May 2002, for a period of six years.

He underwent a command-directed mental health evaluation on 18 June 2002, and was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder, with anxiety.

Based on the finding of an existing prior to service (EPTS) condition, i.e., hydronephrosis of the left kidney, he received an uncharacterized entry-level separation on 23 July 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Failed Medical/Physical Procurement Standards).  He was issued RE code 4C (Separated for failure to meet physical standards for enlistment), which is a waiverable code for prior service enlistment.  He was credited with 2 months and 10 days of active service.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that the preponderance of the evidence does not show that the applicant is qualified for service.  In addition to the diagnoses of hydronephrosis of the left kidney and asthma, he was also diagnosed with an Adjustment Disorder while in basic training.

The BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPRSP recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that based on the documentation in the file, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  Additionally, the discharge was within the sound discretion of the discharge authority.  Airmen are given entry-level separation/uncharacterized service characterization when separation is initiated in the first 180 days continuous active service.

The AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D.

AFPC/DPPAE recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that the BCMR Medical Consultant determined that the entry-level separation was appropriate, as the history of pain would have precluded initial enlistment.

The AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

Complete copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 21 November 2003 for review and response within 30 days.  However, 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 error or injustice to warrant upgrading the applicant’s RE Code.  After thoroughly reviewing the available evidence of record and noting the applicant’s complete submission, we find no evidence of error or injustice.  In this respect, the discharge appears to be in compliance with the governing instruction in effect at the time of his separation.  The applicant has provided no evidence to indicate that his separation was inappropriate.  His assigned RE code of 4C accurately reflects that he was separated for failing to meet physical/procurement standards for enlistment.  Furthermore, RE code 4C is a code that can be waived for prior service enlistment consideration, provided he meets all other requirements for enlistment under an existing prior service program.  Whether or not he is successful will depend on the needs of the service and there is no guarantee that he will be allowed to return to any branch of the service.  Absent persuasive evidence applicant was denied rights to which entitled, appropriate regulations were not followed, or appropriate standards were not applied, we find no basis to disturb the existing record.

_________________________________________________________________

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 Docket Number BC-2003-01539 in Executive Session on 7 January 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 29 Apr 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 29 Sep 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRSP, dated 30 Oct 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 5 Nov 03.
    Exhibit F.  SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Nov 03.

                                   Panel Chair