RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00287 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reentry (RE) code of 2C (Entry Level Performance or Conduct) be changed to allow him to reenlist. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was unjustly discharged because he could not pass the pull-up requirement on the Physical Ability and Stamina Test (PAST), even though he met or exceeded all the other PAST requirements and the minimum requirements for enlistment. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Air Force on 10 Jan 12. On 12 Apr 12, the applicant’s commander documented the applicant’s AETC Form 125A, Record of Administrative Training Action, with the following: “Member physically unable to complete [Tactical Air Control Party] TACP technical training pipeline. He failed the PAST on 9 Apr 12: pull-ups 4 reps (needed 6). Unable to improve physical performance while in washback status to meet the minimum standards.” On 25 Apr 12, the applicant’s commander notified him he was recommending him for an Entry-Level Separation (ELS) discharge because he failed the pull-up portion of the PAST on 19 Mar 12 and again on 9 Apr 12. Airmen are given ELS with uncharacterized service when separation is initiated in the first 180 days of continuous active service. The Department of Defense (DoD) determined it would be unfair to the member and the service to characterize a member’s limited service when separation is initiated within the first 180 days of active service. On 30 Apr 12, the applicant’s commander recommended him for an ELS. Specifically, he recommended because he failed to make satisfactory progress in a required training program. The discharge package was reviewed and determined to be legally sufficient and, on 3 May 12, the discharge authority directed the applicant be discharge with an ELS. On 10 May 12, the applicant was furnished an ELS with uncharacterized service, an RE code of 2C, a narrative reason for separation of “Entry Level Performance or Conduct,” and was credited with four months and one day of active service. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility, which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. The applicant does not provide any proof of an error or injustice in reference to his RE code. The RE code of 2C is the correct RE code based upon the applicant’s involuntary discharge with honorable [sic] character of service. All components of the military can waive the RE code of 2C if they feel it is appropriate. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He was discharged correctly and does not think his discharge was unfair. He realizes not many are given a second chance; however, if given the opportunity he will perform his best (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 an error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case, to include his rebuttal response to the advisory opinion; however, we do not find the documentation presented sufficient to conclude the applicant has been the victim of an error or injustice with regard to the discharge process. Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation for an Entry Level Separation (ELS) with uncharacterized character of service, the applicant’s RE code of 2C was required in accordance with AF Instruction 36-2606, Reenlistment in the United States Air Force, and the discharge action was within the commander's discretionary authority. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief. ________________________________________________________________ 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-2013-00287 in Executive Session on 12 Nov 13, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 8 Jan 12, w/atchs. Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 14 Feb 13. Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Feb 13. Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 15 Mar 13. Panel Chair