RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00881 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. He be reinstated on active duty effective 28 Feb 07, with retroactive pay. 2. His reentry (RE) code of 2C (involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge) be changed to a favorable RE code.” 3. He be extended on active duty for a period of two years with a Date of Separation (DOS) of 19 Sep 11. 4. He be promoted to the grade of senior airman (E-4/SrA). 5. He be eligible to test for promotion to the grade of staff sergeant (E-5/SSgt). 6. He be given an opportunity to take his Career Development Course (CDC) test for his 5-skill level training. 7. He be eligible for tuition assistance and other educational benefits and entitlements from 2005 to present. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His reason for separation of adjustment disorder is erroneous. In a 10-page statement, the applicant outlines how he was the victim of unfair treatment. Among the major points he makes are: After returning from his deployment, he found his room vandalized and pretty much destroyed. He reported this to his supervisor, who he believes might have been an accomplice. He tried to exercise his right under Article 139 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) by reporting the incident to his superintendent and chain of command. However, all of his actions were to no avail; none of his co-workers were punished and he was reprised against for reporting the incident. He had a good performance record and did not receive good representation from his area defense counsel. He was labeled as having an adjustment disorder and psychological problems. In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a personal statement, giving a description of the circumstances surrounding his diagnosis and separation action; extracts from his military personnel record, including copies of his DD Forms 214, Certificate or Release or Discharge from Active Duty, issued in conjunction with 28 Feb 07 separation, several letters of recommendation and character reference. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Prior to the events under review, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force, on 20 Sep 05, for a period of five years. On 7 Feb 07, the squadron commander notified the applicant that he was initiating administrative discharge action for mental disorders. The specific reason for the proposed action was that on or about 1 Feb 07, the applicant was diagnosed with an Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Disturbance of Emotions and Conduct, to include problems related to occupation, primary support, and social environment which significantly impaired his ability to function in the military environment. On that same date, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the discharge notification, and on 13 Feb 07, he submitted statements in his own behalf. The Staff Judge Advocate found the case file legally sufficient to support separation and recommended an honorable discharge, without probation and rehabilitation (P&R). The discharge authority approved the honorable discharge, without P&R. The applicant was honorably discharged, on 28 Feb 07, with a reason for separation of adjustment disorder and issued an RE code of 2B (Separated with a general or under other than honorable conditions (UOTCH) discharge, which was subsequently corrected to 2C (involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service. He was credited with 1 year, 5 months, and 11 days of active duty service. The applicant requested his application be administratively closed, in Jan 11, and requested it be reopened in Jan 12. ________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial of the applicant’s request for a change to his narrative reason for separation, separation code, and reinstatement. The applicant’s claims of unfair treatment are not supported by the record, nor does he provide evidence to substantiate his petition. Based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge to include the narrative reason for separation was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge instruction and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. They found no evidence of an error or injustice in the processing of the applicant's discharge action. The complete DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial of the applicant’s request to have his RE code changed to an eligible code. They note the applicant was involuntarily discharged for an adjustment disorder and received an erroneous RE code of 2B (Separated with a general or under other than honorable conditions (UOTCH) discharge, which was corrected to 2C (involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service. They indicate the applicant has not provided any proof of an error or injustice in reference to his RE code. His justification for his request is in reference to his circumstances that led to his discharge and his discharge processing. The RE code 2C is required per AFI 36-2606, Reenlistments in the USAF, chapter 3, based on his involuntary discharge with an honorable character of service. The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D. AFPC/DPSIPV recommends denial of the applicant’s request for reinstatement and service credit, noting the applicant was involuntarily discharged with 1 year, 5 months, and 11 days of active service, after being diagnosed with an Adjustment Disorder. The complete DPSIPV evaluation is at Exhibit E. AF/A1DLV recommends denial of the applicant’s request for military tuition assistance. Based on the records provided, they found no way to determine the education status of the applicant during the time period he has requested. He did not attend college prior to separation so he has nothing on which to base a request for military tuition assistance (Mil TA) prior to his separation in 2007. The complete AF/A1DLV evaluation is at Exhibit F. AFPC/DPSIT recommends denial of the applicant’s request to take the Career Development Course (CDC) exam for 3S051B upon reinstatement on active duty. They note the applicant was enrolled in the CDC in Nov 06 and discharged from the Air Force in Feb 07 prior to taking the course exam; his enrollment expired in Dec 07 for non-participation.. The complete DPSIT evaluation is at Exhibit G. AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial of the applicant’s request for promotion to the grade of SrA, stating, in part, he did/does not possess the minimum eligibility requirements of 36 months time- in-service (TIS) and 20 months time-in-grade (TIG) for promotion to SrA. If reinstated to active duty, the applicant would have an opportunity to test for SSgt when he meets all eligibility requirements. The complete DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit H. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He reiterated his original contentions that he was reprised against and that he should receive the requested relief. He believes the letters of support describe the favoritism in his office and that it was not fair to have him discharged. In support of his response, the applicant provides additional testimonies and letters of support. The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit J. ________________________________________________________________ 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 excuse the failure to timely file. 3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. We note the applicant alleges reprisal from his superiors. However, based upon our own independent review of the available evidence, the applicant has not established the actions by his superiors were an act of reprisal. We further note there is no evidence the applicant filed a complaint of reprisal with the IG nor did we find a basis to direct such an investigation. In addition, while the applicant believes his diagnosis is incorrect, the discharge and the assigned RE code appears to comply with the governing AFI and we find no evidence to indicate that his separation or his narrative reason for separation from the Air Force was inappropriate. Therefore, we agree with the opinions and recommendation of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our decision the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of having suffered either an error or injustice. Additionally, in looking at his request in its entirety, we did not find a sufficient basis to determine that his request falls under Title 10 USC 1034 or that the actions of his commander were arbitrary or capricious. In view of the above, we find no basis upon which to favorably consider this application. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2010-00881 in Executive Session on 10 July 2012, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 1 Mar 10, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 27 Sep 10. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 28 Oct 10. Exhibit E. Letter, AFPC/DPSIPV, dated 9 Nov 10. Exhibit F. Letter, AF/A1DLV, dated 17 Nov 10. Exhibit G. Letter, AFPC/DPSIT, dated 30 Nov 10. Exhibit H. Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 7 Dec 10. Exhibit I. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Dec 10. Exhibit J. Letter, Applicant, dated 2 Jan 12.