RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-03767 INDEX CODE: 100.06 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His narrative reason for separation and reentry (RE) codes on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be changed so that he can serve again in the military. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The codes on his DD Form 214 do not represent the agreement he made when he signed his discharge papers. After two under age drinking incidents, he was referred to an alcohol abuse treatment program. He finished the two-week course successfully and thought he could save his career and continue to serve in the Air Force. However, he was discharged 26 days after completing the program. He questioned whether or not his discharge would keep him out of the military for good, and was told that his RE code would only limit him from reentering the Air Force. However, when he tried to join the Navy he was told his RE code would not allow him to reenter any branch of the military. The policy cited in AFI 44-121, Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention and Treatment (ADAPT) Program, Section 3.6., and 3.8., was not executed in a manner that would allow him an opportunity to complete his enlisted contract. The timeline of events did not allow for any outcome metrics to be developed to measure the effectiveness of the education in assisting participants to make appropriate behavioral changes. In support of his request, applicant provided a personal statement, his DD Form 214, a statement of evidence, a timeline of events, excerpts from AFI 44-121, a Letter of Counseling, a Letter of Reprimand, and a discharge summary from River Crest Hospital. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ _ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 1 Nov 06. His commander notified him on 23 Apr 07 of his intent to discharge him based on entry level performance and conduct for the following: (1) a Letter of Counseling on 2 Feb 07, for failure to go to a mandatory formation; (2) an Article 15 on 14 Feb 07, for drinking alcoholic beverages while under the age of 21; and (3) a Letter of Reprimand on 30 Mar 07, for failure to refrain from drinking alcoholic beverages while under the age of 21. He acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge and after consulting with legal counsel, waived his right to submit statements in his own behalf. On 30 Apr 07, the case file was found legally sufficient to support separation. On 7 May 07, applicant received an uncharacterized entry-level separation, by reason of entry level performance and conduct, and was issued an RE code of 2C (Entry-level separation without characterization of service). He served on active duty for a period of six months and seven days. ________________________________________________________________ _ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial of the applicant’s request for an RE code upgrade. There is no error or injustice noted. The commander recommended discharge based on his misconduct and it was approved by the discharge authority. The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial. DPSOS states based on the documentation on file, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. The discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority. He provided no evidence of an error or injustice that occurred during his discharge processing and he provided no facts warranting a change to his discharge. 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. The complete DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 14 Feb 08, the applicant’s counsel submits additional documentation for the Board’s consideration. Applicant’s counsel states that on the basis of equity, the applicant requests that the Board consider the provisions of DODI 1332.28, Section E4.3, as it pertains to post service conduct in assessing the merits of this application. The applicant acknowledges his mistakes and other incidents that were discreditable in nature. He regrets these mistakes that occurred because of youth and immaturity, which ended his military career, and adversely affected his future. The applicant submits documentation attesting to his positive post service conduct and accomplishments. In response to the Air Force advisory the applicant states that he was told he was only going to be denied reenlistment by the Air Force. This information was false, and had he known this when he was out processing for his discharge, he would have requested a lawyer and consulted with his parents. He was also told his entry level separation would be as if he had never been in the military, and would only affect his reentry in the Air Force. This was another false statement. After attending the alcohol rehabilitation program, he learned a lot about alcohol use and its detriments. He was never allowed the chance to prove that he learned from his alcohol abuse after successfully completing the program. He made the decision not to appeal the entry level separation with an RE code of 214 [sic] because he was not given the correct information about his discharge. He is concerned about any Federal employment he may pursue, that may reference his military records. Counsel’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit F. ________________________________________________________________ _ 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. The applicant has provided no evidence showing that his separation and RE codes are in error or contrary to the prevailing instruction. The applicant’s discharge appears to be in compliance with the governing instruction and we find no evidence to indicate that his separation was inappropriate. Therefore, his uncharacterized character of service is correct and in accordance with DoD and Air Force instructions. An entry-level/ uncharacterized separation should not be viewed as negative and should not be confused with other types of separation. The RE code which was issued at the time of applicant’s separation accurately reflects the circumstances of his separation and we do not find this code to be in error or unjust. We therefore, conclude that no basis exists upon which to recommend favorable action on his request that it be changed. While a RE code of 2C indicates “Conditions Barring Immediate Reenlistment,” we note that the Navy may elect to waive his ineligibility and allow him to enlist if they so desire. Therefore, in the absence of persuasive evidence to the contrary, we adopt the rationale provided by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice and conclude that no basis exists to recommend granting the relief sought in 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 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-2007-03767 in Executive Session on 20 Mar 08, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number BC-2007-03767 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 Nov 07, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 4 Dec 07, w/atchs. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 14 Dec 07. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Jan 08. Exhibit F. Letter, Counsel, dated 14 Feb 08, w/atchs.