RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-02053
		INDEX CODE:  112.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He desires his RE code changed from a 2C to a 1 or 3 series in order to serve in the United States Navy.  He states he is looking forward to a second chance to serve his country and make a contribution to his family.  He is sorry for the misunderstandings and lack of immaturity he showed during basic training.  None of the incidents that occurred were in spite.  He regrets any problems that fellow recruits or officers endured during his enrollment training.  He is now a better person with a changed attitude, more mature and determined to do what it takes to return to military services.  He further states at the time of separation, he asked and pleaded not to be separated.  There was no representation for military legal counsel present when the separation documents were signed.  He was instructed to sign and initial where needed.  He signed under pressure and duress not knowing the severity of the documents.  There was no explanation of his rights and he thought he had no other choice.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 26 February 2002 in the grade of airman basic for a period of four years.

On 9 May 2002, applicant was notified of his commander's intent to initiate discharge action against him for unsatisfactory entry-level performance or conduct.  Specifically, his failure to adapt to the military environment; failure to make satisfactory progress in a required training program; his reluctance to make the effort necessary to meet Air Force standards of conduct and duty performance and his lack of self-discipline.

The commander advised applicant of his right to consult legal counsel and to submit statements in his own behalf; or waive the above rights after consulting with counsel.

After consulting with counsel, applicant waived his right to submit statements in his own behalf.

On 10 May 2002, a legal review was conducted and the Assistant Staff Judge Advocate recommended the applicant be separated with an entry-level separation.

On 13 May 2002, the convening authority approved the applicant’s discharge.

On 17 May 2002, the applicant was discharged in the grade of airman basic, with an Entry-Level Separation, under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Entry-Level Performance and Conduct) and given an RE code of 2C (Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge, or entry-level separation without characterization of service).  He completed 2 months and 22 days of total active duty service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial.  They indicated based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  The discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority.  The applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.  He provided no facts warranting a change to his RE code.

The evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPAE indicated the applicant’s RE code is correct.  No evidence was presented to support changing the RE code.  Waivers of RE codes for enlistment are considered and approval based on the needs of the respective military service and recruiting initiatives at the time of the enlistment inquiry.

The evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 6 February 2004, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant for review and response 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 an error or injustice that would warrant a change to his RE code.  After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, it is our opinion that given the circumstances surrounding his separation from the Air Force, the RE code assigned was proper and in compliance with the appropriate directives.  The applicant has not provided any evidence which would lead us to believe otherwise.  Therefore, we agree with the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rational as the basis for our conclusion that he has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  In the absence of persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought.

4.	Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or an injustice warranting a change in the narrative reason for separation.  After reviewing the applicant’s submission and the evidence of record, we are persuaded that some relief is warranted.  We note that the discharge action taken against the applicant was in accordance with the applicable instruction.  However, after reviewing the applicant’s request and the evidence of record, we find the narrative reason for his entry-level separation, i.e., entry-level performance and conduct, to be inaccurate.  In our deliberations of this case, it appeared to us that while the applicant may have had problems progressing in his basic military training course, we have seen no possible evidence of service misconduct; rather it appears he had a lack of self-discipline which may have contributed to his lack of motivation.  Therefore, in order to correct an injustice of improperly labeling the applicant, his narrative reason for separation should be corrected to more accurately reflect the circumstances of his separation.  In view of the foregoing, we recommend the applicant’s records be corrected by deleting the words “and conduct” from his narrative reason for separation.

_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected by deleting the words “and conduct” from Block 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, issued on 17 May 2002.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2003-02053 in Executive Session on 10 March 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

All members voted to correct the records, as recommended.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 14 November 2003, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 28 January 2004.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 3 February 2004
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 February 2004.

				

AFBCMR BC-2003-02053

MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

	Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that:

	The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to  , be corrected by deleting the words “and conduct” from Block 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, issued on 17 May 2002.