RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01614 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of “6U” (Not selected for reentry by the commander) on his National Guard Bureau Form 22, Report of Separation and Record of Service, be upgraded so he may reenter the military. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was sent home from technical training to be reclassified because no other jobs were available at the time. He was instructed to wait a month and then see what was available and proceed. Once the month passed, he was advised that he needn’t attend Unit Training Assemblies (UTA). In October 2009, he received discharge papers in the mail stating he was being discharged for “unsatisfactory participation” and was being given a reenlistment code of 6U for not attending drill. He did not receive certified documents in the mail from his unit regarding the unsatisfactory participation. He was also not aware what the 6U RE code meant, nor was it explained. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Air National Guard on 31 Jan 08. A complete copy of the applicant’s discharge package was not available; however, the legal review and the discharge order documents were available. On 20 Aug 09, according to the legal review conducted on the applicant’s discharge action, the recommendation for the applicant’s entry-level separation for failure to satisfactorily progress in the required career field subject matter was found to be legally sufficient and the discharge authority concurred with the commander’s recommendation. On 5 Oct 09, the applicant was furnished an entry-level separation with uncharacterized service and was credited with one year, eight months, and five days of Reserve service. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: NGB/A1PP recommends denial indicating the applicant was appropriately discharged. The applicant was separated after he completed basic training but before he completed technical training school (TTS). Members must complete both basic training and TTS within 365 days from enlistment or must be separated in accordance with ANGI-36-2002, Enlistment and Reenlistment in the Air National Guard and as A Reserve of the Air Force. The applicant did not meet the requirements for his original projected Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC). He was reclassified into another AFSC, which he later failed to progress in and was returned to state and ultimately separated. However, after contacting the applicant’s unit, it was determined an RE Code of 6N (formal school eliminee) would be more appropriate, reflecting him as a formal school eliminee, and the board should therefore direct this change in RE Code. A complete copy of the NGB/A1PP evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 4 Aug 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). As of this date, no response has been received by this office. 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 an error or injustice with respect to the applicant’s request that he be issued a reentry (RE) code that would allow him to be eligible for immediate reenlistment. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice with respect to his entry-level separation with uncharacterized service. 4. Notwithstanding the above, sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error with respect to the RE code issued in conjunction with his entry- level separation. In this respect, we note the comments of the Air Force OPR indicating that the applicant should have been issued an RE code of 6N (formal school eliminee), instead of 6U (Not selected for reentry by the commander), as the former is more appropriate to the applicant’s circumstances. Therefore, we recommend the applicant’s records be corrected to the extent indicated below. THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 5 October 2009, he was issued a reentry (RE) code of 6N (formal school eliminee) in conjunction with his entry-level separation with uncharacterized service. The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-01614 in Executive Session on 29 Jan 15, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: All members voted to correct the records as recommended. The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 14 Apr 14. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, NGB/A1PP, dated 28 Jul 14. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Aug 14.