RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-03352
		INDEX CODE:  100.03, 100.06
	XXXXXXX	COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His uncharacterized entry-level separation be changed and his 
reenlistment eligibility (RE) code “2C” be changed so that he 
may reenlist into the Armed Forces.
________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He believes that he deserves the chance to reenlist in the 
military. He feels the job choice he made was not a good 
selection for him. Given the opportunity to come back, he will 
be able to serve in another job choice. Meanwhile, the record is 
in error because it does not reflect his desire to serve. 

In support of his application, the applicant has provided a 
letter from the Army National Guard of Colorado, and a DD Form 
293, Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed 
Forces of the United States. 

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

________________________________________________________________
_

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force as an airman 
basic on 19 December 2006 for a term of four years. 

On 18 April 2007, the commander notified the member that he was 
recommending his discharge from the Air Force for entry-level 
performance and conduct. Basis for the commander’s 
recommendation was that the applicant failed to make 
satisfactory progress in a required training program. 
Specifically, the applicant failed Block 3, Unit 6. He tested 
twice with scores of 60% and 50%. The minimum passing score is 
70%.

Applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge 
and understood he may be discharged with an entry-level 
separation. 
________________________________________________________________
_
The base legal office reviewed the case and found it legally 
sufficient to support separation and recommended he be separated 
with an entry-level separation. The discharge authority approved 
the separation and directed he be separated with an 
uncharacterized entry-level discharge. 

The applicant was involuntarily discharged under the provisions 
of AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen (entry-level 
performance and conduct) with uncharacterized service and a “2C” 
(“Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry-
level separation without characterization of service”) RE code. 
He served 4 months and 7 days on active duty.

________________________________________________________________
_

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial and states that 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.  This 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 character of service or his RE 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.


AFPC/DPSOS’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial and DPSOA finds no evidence of 
error or injustice. The “2C” RE code for his separation is 
correct. 

________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluation were forwarded to the 
applicant on 30 November 2007, for review and comment within 30 
days.  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 an error or injustice concerning 
the applicant’s RE code.  The applicant has provided no evidence 
showing that his assigned RE code is in error or contrary to the 
prevailing instruction.  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 RE code “2” series indicates 
“Conditions Barring Immediate Reenlistment,” we note that the 
Army National Guard may elect to waive his ineligibility and 
allow him to enlist if they so desire. Therefore, we agree with 
the opinions and recommendation of the Air Force offices of 
primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis 
for our conclusion that the applicant has not established that 
she has been the victim of an error or injustice.  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 a 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-
2007-03352 in Executive Session on 17 January 2008, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

			XXXXXXXXXXX, Panel Chair
			XXXXXXXXXXX, Member
			XXXXXXXXXXX, Member






The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number 
BC-2007-03352 was considered:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 6 Oct 07, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.	Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 24 Oct 07.
	Exhibit D.	Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 7 Nov 07.
	Exhibit E.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Nov 07.





	XXXXXXXXXXXXX
	Panel Chair