RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-02291
            INDEX CODE:  112.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general  (under  honorable  conditions)  discharge  be  upgraded  to  an
honorable discharge and his Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code changed.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was given a general discharge so that his commander could recoup a  bonus
from him.  He failed a Career Development Course (CDC)  test  and  was  sent
for a command directed mental health evaluation  and  was  told  he  had  an
adjustment disorder.  He was  opposed  to  the  involuntary  discharge,  was
discharged and was told it was voluntary.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provided a personal statement.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 19 April 2000  in  the  grade
of airman basic for a period of 6 years.

On 17 August 2001, the applicant was notified of his commander's  intent  to
initiate discharge action against him for  conditions  that  interfere  with
military service, more  specifically,  an  Adjustment  Disorder  with  mixed
emotional features, Mixed Receptive - Expressive Language disorder,  Reading
Disorder,  and  for  misconduct,  more  specifically,   Minor   Disciplinary
Infractions.



The commander indicated in his recommendation for discharge action  that  on
or about 13  June  2001,  the  applicant  intentionally  failed  his  Career
Development Course test with the purpose to get out of the  Air  Force.   He
had expressed a strong desire to leave military service at any cost and  had
expressed suicidal intentions to his supervisor.  The applicant  received  a
Command Directed Mental Health Evaluation, which resulted in a diagnosis  of
an Axis I, Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Emotional  Features,  Occupational
Problems.  He further indicated that he  did  not  recommend  probation  and
rehabilitation.  Retention in a probationary status  would  be  inconsistent
with the maintenance of good order and discipline and would have an  adverse
impact  on  morale  within  the  squadron.   In  addition,  he   recommended
initiating recoupment action on the  unserved  portion  of  the  applicant’s
enlistment bonus.

The commander advised applicant of his right to consult  legal  counsel  and
submit statements in his  own  behalf;  or  waive  the  above  rights  after
consulting with counsel.

After consulting with counsel, applicant  requested  retention  in  the  Air
Force and indicated that he would submit a written presentation  in  support
of his request for retention.

On  19  September  2001,  the  discharge  authority   approved   applicant’s
discharge.

On 21 September 2001, the applicant was discharged  with  a  general  (under
honorable conditions) discharge, in the grade of airman first  class,  under
the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Misconduct).  He completed 1 year,  5  months
and 2 days of total active duty service.

On 9  May  2002,  the  Air  Force  Discharge  Review  Board  (AFDRB)  denied
applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge to an honorable,  change
of the narrative reason for discharge, and upgrade of his reenlistment  code
to  enable  him  to  reenlist.   They  concluded  that  the  discharge   was
consistent  with  the  procedural  and  substantive  requirements   of   the
discharge  regulation  and  was  within  the  discretion  of  the  discharge
authority and that  the  applicant  was  provided  full  administrative  due
process.  They further concluded that no legal or  equitable  basis  existed
for upgrade of discharge, change of narrative reason or RE code.

The applicant received an RE code of 2K (Has been formally notified  by  the
unit commander of initiation of involuntary separation action).






Per HQ AFPC/DPPAES an error with the  applicant’s  RE  code  was  identified
when he submitted a request for  correction  of  military  records.   On  15
October 2002, the applicant was notified that his RE code was  corrected  to
reflect  2B  (Separated  with  a  general  or  under  other  than  honorable
conditions (UOTHC) discharge).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS  recommended  denial.   They  indicated  that  based   upon   the
documentation in the file, they believe the discharge  was  consistent  with
the procedural and substantive requirements  of  the  discharge  regulation.
Additionally, the discharge was  within  the  discretion  of  the  discharge
authority.  The Air Force Discharge Review Board denied an upgrade on 9  May
2002.

The evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPAE indicated that the RE code of 2K, “Has been formally notified  by
the unit commander  of  initiation  of  involuntary  separation  action”  is
incorrect.  It should be 2B  “Involuntarily  separated  with  a  general  or
under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge.”

The evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed the evaluations and indicated that  he  intentionally
failed his end of course exam to be cross-trained, not to  get  out  of  the
Air Force. He did not want to be a jet mechanic because he was not  good  at
being a mechanic.  He states  that  he  is  not  looking  for  an  honorable
discharge to be handed to him, he wants the opportunity to reenlist and  get
the honorable discharge on his own.

Applicant’s response is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

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 probable error or injustice.  After  thoroughly  reviewing  the
evidence of record, we are not persuaded that the  applicant  has  been  the
victim of either an error or an injustice.   The  Board  believes  that  the
discharge apparently complied with the governing  regulation  in  effect  at
that time; responsible officials applied appropriate standards in  effecting
the separation, and  the  Board  does  not  find  persuasive  evidence  that
pertinent regulations were violated or that applicant was not  afforded  all
the rights to which entitled at the time  of  discharge.   In  view  of  the
above finding, we find no compelling 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  02-02291
in Executive Session on 10 December 2002, under the provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                  Ms. Olga M. Crerar, Panel Chair
                  Ms. Brenda L. Romine, Member
                  Mr. James W. Russell III, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 4 July 2002, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 8 October 2002.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 6 August 2002, w/atchs.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 October 2002.
   Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated 2 November 2002.




                                BRENDA L. ROMINE
                                Panel Chair