RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03792 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. His entry-level separation with uncharacterized service be changed to reflect an Honorable discharge. 2. His separation program designator (SPD) and reentry (RE) codes and narrative reason for separation be changed accordingly. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was misdiagnosed while on active duty and both the Air National Guard and a civilian physician agreed on the different diagnosis. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _________________ ______________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 5 Feb 02, the applicant commenced his enlistment in the Regular Air Force (RegAF). On 31 Jul 02, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was recommending his discharge from the Air Force for Erroneous Enlistment. The reason for the action was the applicant was diagnosed with asthma; it was determined this condition existed prior to service and was not permanently aggravated by service. His ability to function in a military environment was significantly impaired. On 31 Jul 02, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the action and waived his right to consult with legal counsel and submit statements in his own behalf. On 1 Aug 02, the case was found to be legally sufficient and, on 2 Aug 02, the discharge authority directed the applicant be furnished an entry-level separation. On 9 Aug 02, the applicant was furnished an entry-level separation with uncharacterized service and a narrative reason for separation of ”Erroneous Entry,” and was issued SPD and RE codes of “JFC” and “2C,” respectively. He was credited with six months and five days of total active service. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force, which are attached at Exhibits C, D, and E. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial of the applicant’s request to change his service characterization for discharge, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. Based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge, to include the service characterization, was appropriately administered and within the discretion of the discharge authority. Airmen are given entry-level separation with uncharacterized service when separation is initiated in the first 180 days of continuous service. Therefore, his character of service, SPD and RE codes, and narrative reason for separation are correct and in accordance with DoD and Air Force instructions. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C. AETC/SGPS recommends denial of the applicant’s request to change his RE code, noting the separation was carried out in accordance with established policy and administrative procedures. Since the RE code was based on review and testing done while the applicant was on active duty, there is no basis to support a change in his original RE code. A complete copy of the AETC/SGPS evaluation is at Exhibit D. AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial of the applicant’s request to change his RE code, noting the 2C RE code is required based on his entry-level separation with uncharacterized service and the applicant did not provide any proof of an error or injustice in reference to his RE code. The RE code 2C is not based on a medical review and testing accomplished while the applicant was on active duty, but is required based on the fact he received an entry-level separation. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit E. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 3 Feb 13, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit F). 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 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 an error or injustice. After careful consideration of applicant's request and the available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant corrective action. The facts and opinions stated in the advisory opinions appear to be based on the evidence of record and have not been adequately rebutted by the applicant. Absent persuasive evidence the applicant was denied rights to which he was 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 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-2012-03792 in Executive Session on 2 Apr 13, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-03792 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 15 Aug 12, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 29 Jan 13. Exhibit D. Letter, AETC/SGPS, dated 30 Oct 12, w/atch. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Feb 13.