RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02433
            INDEX CODE:  100.06, 110.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  11 FEBRUARY 2008

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed from “2C” to  an  eligible
code to permit reentry into the military.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The medical officer handling  his  discharge  told  him  he  could  reenlist
anytime as long as he met the age eligibility.

He entered the Air Force as a security forces  apprentice.   In  his  second
week of technical training during a firing exercise for the M60,  there  was
a weapon malfunction resulting in minor  injuries.   As  a  result  of  this
injury he was offered a change in military occupational specialty (MOS),  or
a discharge.  He chose the MOS  offer  which  was  a  change  from  security
forces to intelligence.   The  intelligence  training  required  he  have  a
sufficient security clearance to start school.  After three weeks without  a
class assignment, being detailed to the Laundromat,  and  assigned  cleaning
chores, he became  very  frustrated.   His  frustration  led  to  discipline
problems.  He was told by another enlistee  if  he  requested  psychological
counseling he could get out of the service.  Since he was not receiving  the
classification needed, and was not allowed to  start  classes,  he  did  not
want to fold laundry for four years.

He has never lost his desire to serve his country.  He is now 24,  and  owns
his own lawn & landscape business.  He would  like  to  actively  serve  his
country and have the opportunity to return  to  the  military  and  possibly
make it his lifetime career.

In support of his request, applicant provided his  personal  statement,  and
his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty.

The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 29 Dec 98, in  the  grade  of
airman basic (E-1), for a  period  of  four  years,  as  a  Security  Forces
Apprentice.

On 3-10 May 99, a mental health evaluation was conducted and  the  following
diagnoses were made:

     Axis I:    Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Emotions and
                Disturbance of Conduct:  chronic
     Axis II:   Personality Disorder NOS, with anti-social and
                passive/aggressive traits
     Axis III:  None by patient report

On 17 May 99, the squadron commander notified  the  applicant  that  he  was
recommending he be discharged from the Air Force for mental health  reasons.
 If approved his discharge would be described as an entry level  separation.
 His reason for the proposed action  was  a  statement  of  evaluation  from
doctors at the Behavioral Health Clinic stating that  applicant’s  continued
service in the USAF was  not  recommended.   Also,  his  ability  to  handle
stress and his adverse hostile reactivity significantly impairs his  ability
to function in the military.

On 18 May 99, applicant acknowledged receipt of the  discharge  notification
and waived his right to consult with legal counsel and submit statements  in
his own behalf.

The wing deputy staff judge advocate found the case file legally  sufficient
to support separation and recommended applicant be separated with an  entry-
level separation without probation and rehabilitation.  On  7  Jun  99,  the
discharge authority approved an entry-level separation.

On 14  Jun  99,  the  applicant  received  an  uncharacterized  entry  level
separation and was issued an RE code of 2C (involuntarily separated with  an
entry-level separation).  He served 5 months and 16 days on active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied,  and  states,  in  part,
based on the documentation on file in  the  master  personnel  records,  the
discharge was consistent with the procedural  and  substantive  requirements
of the discharge regulation.  The discharge was  within  the  discretion  of
the discharge authority.

Applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors  or  injustices
that occurred in the discharge processing.  He provided no facts  warranting
a change to his reenlistment eligibility code.

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.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant  provided  additional  documents  in  the  form  of  a  Report  of
Psychiatric Evaluation, a letter of character reference from  his  Rabbi,  a
letter of recommendation from the St. Lucie Board  of  County  Commissioners
Department of Veterans Services, a mental health  evaluation,  a  letter  of
character reference from a client, and a statement from his parents.

Applicant’s complete 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 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.  At the time a  member  is  separated  from
the Air Force, they are furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality  of
their service and the circumstances of their separation.  The assigned  code
reflects the Air Force’s position regarding whether or  not  or  under  what
circumstances, the individual should be allowed to reenlist.   The  evidence
of  record  supports  the  Air  Force’s  stated  reasons   for   applicant’s
separation.  We noted the great changes in the  applicant’s  life,  however,
we are not persuaded that the assigned code is in error or unjust or that  a
change of the RE code is warranted.  Therefore, in the absence  of  evidence
to the contrary, 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  Docket  Number     BC-2006-
02433 in Executive Session on 24 October 2006, under the provisions  of  AFI
36-2603:

      Mr. Michael V. Barbino, Panel Chair
      Mr. James L. Sommer, Member
      Mr. Vance E. Lineberger, Member

The following documentary evidence  pertaining  to  Docket  Number  BC-2006-
02433 was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 8 Aug 06, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 25 Aug 06.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Sep 06.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 3 Oct 06, w/atchs.




                                             MICHAEL V. BARBINO
                                             Panel Chair