RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01924 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her uncharacterized discharge be changed to reflect an honorable discharge. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She would like her record corrected so she can join the Air National Guard (ANG). She provided all pertinent documentation to the Military Entrance Processing Station (MEPS) and was sent to Basic Military Training (BMT) without being required to obtain a waiver. Therefore, her discharge was through no fault of her own. In support of her appeal, the applicant provides copies of her discharge file to include medical records. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ _ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force who served on active duty from 21 August 2012 to 21 September 2012. A medical narrative summary dated 18 September 2012, indicates the applicant did not meet the minimum medical standards to enlist due to her condition of Syncope (a medical term for fainting or passing out – a transient loss of consciousness and postural tone usually related to a temporary insufficient blood flow to the brain). As a result, on 19 September 2012, the applicant was notified of her commander’s intent to recommend her for an uncharacterized entry-level separation for erroneous enlistment under the authority of Air Force Program Directive (AFPD) 36-32 and Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-3208, Chapter 5, Section C, Defective Enlistments, Paragraph 5.14, under Basis for Discharge for Erroneous Enlistment. The commander’s notification indicated that she would be eligible to reenlist into the Air Force with an approved waiver. The applicant acknowledged receipt of her commander’s intent, waived her rights to counsel and to submit statements in her own behalf. An Area Defense Counsel (ADC) questionnaire indicates the applicant waivered her right to talk to an ADC because she may try to reenlist in the future once she obtained a waiver from her civilian provider. Subsequently, the discharge authority approved the recommended discharge. The applicant was discharged effective 21 September 2012, with an uncharacterized entry-level separation. Her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, indicates her narrative reason for separation as “Discharge Failed Medical/Physical Procurement Standards” and, her reentry (RE) code as “4C” (Separated for concealment of juvenile records, minority, failure to meet physical standards for enlistment, failure to attain a 9.0 reading grade level as measured by the Air Force Reading Abilities Test, or void enlistment). She served one month and one day on active duty. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AETC/SGPS recommends approval. SGPS states that based on the documentation on file in the applicant’s records, the separation was done in accordance with established policy and administrative procedures. However, once the applicant has no Syncope episodes for at least two years, she will meet the accession requirements and, if accepted, would qualify for the ANG. The complete SGPS evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial. DPSOR states that based on the documentation on file in the applicant’s master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. Her discharge characterization and RE code is correct as reflected on her DD Form 214. Airmen are given an uncharacterized entry-level separation when separation is initiated in the first 180 days of continuous active service. Her uncharacterized service resulted in her RE code of “4C” and is in accordance with Department of Defense and Air Force instructions. The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 5 August 2013, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). 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 timely filed. 3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case and do not find that it supports a determination that the applicant was improperly separated from active duty in 2012. Because she was within her first 180 days of active service, she was given an entry level separation with uncharacterized service. We find no evidence which would lead us to believe that her uncharacterized service was improper or contrary to the governing instruction under which it was affected. We took note of AETC/SGPS’ evaluation; however, in view of the above and absent persuasive evidence the applicant was denied rights to which entitled, appropriate regulations were not followed, or appropriate standards were not applied, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of AFPC/DPSOR and adopt their rationale as the basis for our determination in this case. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. ________________________________________________________________ _ 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-01924 in Executive Session on 6 February 2014, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-01924: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 Apr 13, w/atchs. Exhibit C. Letter, AETC/SGSP, dated 10 May 13. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 21 Jun 13. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 Aug 13. Chair 4