RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01130
INDEX CODE: 110.02
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE: 16 JULY 2007
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2C be changed to a waiverable
code so that he can enlist in the Navy.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He would like to enlist in the Navy and cannot be placed in the delayed
enlistment program (DEP) with his current RE code. He does not believe
that the RE code was unjust; however, it has been over two years since his
separation from the Air Force. He was told by his former squadron
commander that he could reenlist after two years of separation without a
problem, but would need a waiver if he tried to enlist earlier than two
years after his separation.
The reasons for his discharge were very childish and the things he did were
immature. He is positive that he has learned a lot since that time and
would like the opportunity to try again in the Navy. He did not submit any
supporting documents.
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 27 August 2002, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force at the
age of 18 in the grade of airman basic for a period of six years. He did
not complete basic training.
On 22 October 2002, his commander notified him that he was recommending he
be separated from the Air Force under the provisions of AFPD 36-32 and AFI
36-3208, Chapter 5, Section 5D, Paragraph 5.22.2. His reasons were based
on the applicant’s unsatisfactory entry level performance and conduct to
include: failure to adapt to the military environment, failure to make
satisfactory progress in a required training program; reluctance to make
the effort necessary to meet Air Force standards of conduct and duty
performance; lack of discipline, and minor disciplinary infractions.
The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification and waived his right
to consult counsel or submit statements in his own behalf. The commander
thereafter initiated a recommendation for his separation.
On 28 October 2002, the applicant was separated with an entry-level
separation because of Entry Level Performance and Conduct. He had served
six months and two days on active duty. A reenlistment eligibility (RE)
code of 2C (Involuntarily separated with an entry level separation without
characterization of service) was assigned.
________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial. DPPRS 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, and the discharge was within the discretion of the
discharge authority. DPPRS notes 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 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. DPPRS opines the applicant’s
uncharacterized character of service is correct and in accordance with DoD
and Air Force instructions. DPPRS concludes the applicant did not submit
any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the
discharge processing, and did not provide any facts warranting a change to
his reenlistment eligibility code.
The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluations was forwarded to the applicant on 12
May 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 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. Applicant’s contentions are duly
noted; however, we are not persuaded that the applicant has been the victim
of an error or injustice. At the time members are separated from the Air
Force, they are furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality of their
service and circumstances of their separation. After a thorough review of
the evidence of record, we believe that given the circumstances surrounding
the applicant’s separation, the RE code issued was in accordance with the
appropriate directives. Therefore, we find no basis upon which to
recommend favorable action on this application.
___________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate
the existence of probable 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 this application in Executive
Session on 28 June 2006, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Michael J. Novel, Panel Chair
Mr. Grover L. Dunn, Member
Mr. John E. B. Smith, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC-2006-01130
in:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 11 Apr 06.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 28 Apr 06.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 May 06.
MICHAEL J. NOVEL
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02536
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 | CY2006 | BC-2006-02904
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02904 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 26 MAR 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed from 2C to a favorable one that would allow her to reenlist into the military. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02015
On 11 Aug 2005, the applicant’s commander notified the applicant that he was recommending he be separated from the Air Force under the provisions of AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-3208 for fraudulent entry. On 18 Aug 2005, the applicant was discharged under AFI 36-3208, Fraudulent Entry into Military Service, Drug Abuse, with an uncharacterized entry- level separation, and an RE code of 2C. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02887
Based on the circumstances of his discharge, they found no evidence or injustice; therefore, applicant’s RE code is correct. HQ AFPC/DPPAE’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 9 Nov 06 for review and comment within 30 days. ___________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03909
On 23 Mar 06, applicant received an uncharacterized entry-level separation, by reason of entry level performance and conduct, and was issued an RE code of 2C (Entry-level separation without characterization of service). EXAMINER’S NOTE: In similar cases where the applicant received an entry- level separation for academic failure, the Board has recommended the words “and conduct” be removed from the narrative reason for separation. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | Bc-2006-03903
On 23 Mar 06, applicant received an uncharacterized entry-level separation, by reason of entry level performance and conduct, and was issued an RE code of 2C (Entry-level separation without characterization of service). EXAMINER’S NOTE: In similar cases where the applicant received an entry- level separation for academic failure, the Board has recommended the words “and conduct” be removed from the narrative reason for separation. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02101
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 | CY2006 | BC-2006-02977
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02977 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 1 APR 2008 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His narrative reason for separation be changed to “academic difficulties” rather than “unsatisfactory performance,” and his reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2C (involuntarily...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00416
DPPRS affirms the applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing, and did not provide any facts warranting a change to his reenlistment eligibility code. At the time members are separated from the Air Force, they are furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality of their service and circumstances of their separation. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03288
DPPAE states the applicant’s records were reviewed along with statements she submitted, and based on the circumstances of her discharge find no evidence or injustice. Therefore, the RE code is correct and she has not submitted any evidence nor documentation from medical authorities that the condition no longer exists. The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force...