Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2006-01921
Original file (BC-2006-01921.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

      IN THE MATTER OF:            DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-01921
            INDEX CODE:  110.02
      XXXXXXX          COUNSEL:  NONE

                                  HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  25 DECEMBER 2007
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reentry code be changed from “2C” to a “1.”

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was initially  doing  well  during  the  first  phase  of  his  technical
training; however, towards the end of the training there were  events  going
on back home affecting his ability to successfully  complete  the  training.
He requested to speak with his Military Training  Leader  who  referred  him
for a Behavior Analysis Study; after the study, he was returned to  training
and  washed  out.   Afterwards,  he  was  discharged  after  making  several
requests to his commander to stay in the Air Force.

In support of the application, the applicant submits a personal  memorandum,
a recommendation letter from a retired Master Sergeant, a  copy  of  his  DD
Form 214, Certificate of Release and  Discharge  from  active  duty;  and  a
letter from the applicant to his former commander.

The complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 6 July 2004 for a  period
of four years.  On 10 November 2004, he  was  academically  eliminated  from
the Security Forces Apprentice course. As a result, on 2  December  2004, he
was notified by his commander that he was being recommended  for  discharge.
The authority for this action was AFPD 36-32, Air  Force  Military  Training
and AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, chapter  5,  paragraph
5.22.2. Entry-Level Performance or Conduct.   After  being  advised  of  his
rights, he submitted a statement on his own behalf but waived his  right  to
consult counsel.  The case was reviewed  by  the  base  legal  services  and
found  to  be  legally  sufficient  to  support  discharge.   The  discharge
authority approved the separation and  ordered  an  uncharacterized,  entry-
level separation.

In addition to the Record of Counseling’s (ROC) for  failing  three  written
tests, there was an ROC for missing a  mandatory  formation,  this  ROC  was
also cited as one of the reasons for the applicant’s discharge.

On  17  December  2004,  he  was  discharged  and  issued   an   entry-level
uncharacterized separation.  He received an RE code  of  2C,  “Involuntarily
separated  with  an  entry-level  separation  without  characterization   of
service.”

He served 5 months and 12 days on active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRSP recommends denial.  DPPRSP states 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 of 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.  The applicant did not identify  any  errors  or
injustices  that  occurred  in  the  discharge  process.  Additionally,   he
provided no facts warranting a change in his RE  code  or  narrative  reason
for separation.

The complete HQ AFPC/DPPRS evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force Evaluation was forwarded  to  the  applicant  on  14
July 2006 for review and comment within 30 days.   As  of  this  date,  this
office has received no response (Exhibit D).

_________________________________________________________________



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 to warrant changing the separation  code.
 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 and  adopt  its  rationale
as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not 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 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  BC-2006-
01921 in Executive Session on 22 August 2006, under the  provisions  of  AFI
36-2603:

                 Mr. Robert H. Altman, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Wallace F. Beard Jr., Member
                 Ms. Karen A. Holloman, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 19 June 2006, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 30 June 2006.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 July 2006.




                                   ROBERT H. ALTMAN
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01531

    Original file (BC-2006-01531.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 26 July 2005, he was discharged under the provisions of AFI 36- 3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen for entry-level performance or conduct for failure to make satisfactory progress in a required training program and was issued an entry-level uncharacterized separation. Additionally, he provided no facts warranting a change in his RE code or narrative reason for separation. AFBCMR (Processing) DARYL R. LAWRENCE Examiner Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01428

    Original file (BC-2006-01428.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 19 November 2004, the applicant received notification from his commander that he was being recommended for discharge from the Air Force for conditions that interfere with military service. AFPC/DPPRS complete 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 26 May 2006 for review and comment within 30 days. The Board notes...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02536

    Original file (BC-2006-02536.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was separated from the Air Force on 4 Oct 05. 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 and adopt their rationale as the basis for the conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. The applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing, nor did he provide any facts...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-04021

    Original file (BC-2002-04021.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 20 Nov 91, the discharge authority approved the recommended separation and directed that the applicant be issued an entry level separation. The applicant did not provide any evidence showing the information in the discharge case file was erroneous, his substantial rights were violated, or that his commanders abused their discretionary authority. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01155

    Original file (BC-2003-01155.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01155 COUNSEL: No HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His character of service, separation authority, separation code JFC, narrative reason for separation and reenlistment eligibility (RE) 2C code be changed so that he may pursue a career in the military. The Air Force based this on the reported...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02023

    Original file (BC-2006-02023.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RE code 2C indicates involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service. 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 and adopt their rationale as the basis for the conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. The applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02210

    Original file (BC-2004-02210.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 18 March 2004, he received a Letter of Counseling for failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty. Evidence has not been provided in support of his appeal, which would lead us to believe that a change to his RE code is warranted. Absent persuasive evidence that the applicant was denied rights to which he was entitled or that the appropriate standards were not applied during his discharge processing, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02635

    Original file (BC-2004-02635.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He really wants to get his RE code changed because he wants to be in the Air Force. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, it is our opinion that given the circumstances surrounding his separation from the Air Force, the narrative reason for separation and separation codes assigned were proper and in compliance with the appropriate directives. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02101

    Original file (BC-2006-02101.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02101 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 9 JANUARY 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be corrected so he can re-enter the Air Force. Additionally, he provided no facts warranting a change in his RE code or narrative reason for separation. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00455

    Original file (BC-2005-00455.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The Board should review her DD Form 214 to either accept or decline the change in her RE code. On 22 October 2004, the applicant received notification from her commander that she was being recommended for discharge. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC- 2005-00455 in Executive Session on 6 April 2005,...