RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-00653
		INDEX NUMBER:  100.06

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  YES

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of 2C be changed to a waiverable RE code.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The RE code he received at the time of his discharge was not in error.  He was young and immature and used the system to get out of an unpleasant situation.  He did not fully understand the consequences of his actions at the time, and would like to remedy his decision.  It has been nearly ten years since he left the Air Force.  Since his discharge, he has obtained his Bachelor’s Degree with a 3.3 GPA.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 21 Jun 94, in the grade of airman basic (E-1), for a period of four years.  

On 1 Jul 94, applicant was referred for a mental health evaluation and was deemed fit for duty and was recommended to attend the Airman’s re-motivation group.

On 5 Jul 94, a second mental health evaluation was conducted and the following diagnoses were made:  

     Axis I:    Occupational Problem
     Axis II:   No diagnosis (antisocial, narcissistic and 
                passive-aggressive traits)
     Axis III:  Non-contributory

On 12 Jul 94, the applicant received notification that he was being recommended for discharge from the Air Force for unsatisfactory entry-level performance or conduct.  The basis for this action was the applicant’s lack of aptitude for military service, failure to adapt to the military environment, failure to make satisfactory progress in a required training program, reluctance to make the effort necessary to meet Air Force standards of conduct and duty performance, and lack of self-discipline.

On 12 Jul 94, applicant acknowledged receipt of the discharge notification and waived his right to consult with legal counsel and submit statements in his own behalf.

On 14 Jul 94, the wing assistant staff judge advocate found the case file legally sufficient to support separation and recommended applicant be separated with an entry level separation.  On 20 Jul 94, the discharge authority approved an entry level separation.  

On 22 Jul 94, the applicant received an uncharacterized entry level separation and was issued an RE code of 2C (involuntarily separated under AFR 39-10 with an entry level separation).  He served 1 month and 2 days on active duty.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied, and states, in part, 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.

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 the character of service or a change to his reenlistment eligibility code.

Airmen are given entry-level separation/uncharacterized service characterization when separation is initiated in the first 180 days of continuous active service.  The Department of Defense (DoD) determined if a member served less than 180 days continuous active service, it would be unfair to the member and the service to characterize their limited service.  Therefore, his uncharacterized character of service is correct and in accordance with DoD and Air Force instructions.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit C.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 26 Mar 04, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days.  To date, a reply has not been received by this office (Exhibit D).

___________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations.

2.  The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to waive the failure to timely file.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice.  At the time a member is separated from the Air Force, they are furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality of their service and the circumstances of their separation.  After careful consideration of the evidence provided, we are not persuaded that the assigned RE code is in error or unjust or that an upgrade of the RE code is warranted.  Therefore, we find no basis upon which to recommend favorable action on this application.

4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issue(s) involved.  Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered

___________________________________________________________________

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-2004-00653 in Executive Session on 10 June 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36‑2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 23 Feb 04
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 17 Mar 04
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 Mar 04