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 separated
with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without
characterization of service) be changed to a code which will allow
him to reenter the service.
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He could not grasp the subject material resulting in poor academic
scores. However, he would like to reenter the service at a later
date and believes he is still an asset.
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
___________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 24 Jan 06 for a
period of six years.
On 13 May 06, applicant received a Letter of Counseling (LOC) for
failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of
duty.
On 7 Aug 06, the squadron commander initiated administrative
discharge action against the applicant for unsatisfactory
performance. The reason for the proposed action was that applicant
failed to make satisfactory progress in a required technical
training program. He was eliminated from the Fighter Aircraft
Maintenance Apprentice (F-16) training course for unsatisfactory
performance after failing Block II, Unit 11, Test A, and Block 4,
Unit 4, Test A, twice with scores of 42%, 35%, and 55%
respectively. Minimum passing score being 70%. Prior to
disenrollment, applicant was counseled concerning his performance
and received special individualized assistance, and was washed back
three times, and attended Study Skills, Test Anxiety and Reading
Comprehension courses. Efforts to improve his academic performance
were met with negative results.
On that same date, applicant acknowledged receipt of the discharge
notification. He waived his right to consult counsel and to submit
statements in his own behalf. On 15 Aug 06, the Deputy Staff Judge
Advocate found the case to be legally sufficient. On 17 Aug 06,
the discharge authority directed applicant be discharged with an
honorable discharge without probation and rehabilitation.
On 18 Aug 06, applicant was honorably discharged by reason of
“unsatisfactory performance,” and was issued an RE code of 2C. He
was credited with 6 months and 25 days of active duty service.
___________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial of applicant’s request. They
found the discharge was consistent with the procedural and
substantive requirements of the discharge instruction.
Additionally, the discharge was within the discretion of the
discharge authority. They also noted the applicant did not submit
any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in
the discharge processing, nor provided any facts warranting a
change to his narrative reason for separation or reentry code.
HQ AFPC/DPPRS’s 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 9 Nov 06 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this
date, no response has been received by this office (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 error or injustice. We took notice of
the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the
case. The applicant requests his reason for separation of
“unsatisfactory performance” be changed. However, we found no
evidence which would lead us to believe that the applicant's
separation or reason for separation were in error or contrary to
the governing Air Force instructions. Additionally, 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. Applicant’s RE code of 2C accurately reflects
that he was involuntarily separated with an honorable
characterization of service and given the circumstances surrounding
his separation, we believe the RE code issued was in accordance
with the governing directives. Therefore, in the absence of
persuasive 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-2006-02977 in Executive Session on 20 December 2006, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Michael J. Novel, Panel Chair
Mr. Reginald P. Howard, Member
Mr. Vance E. Lineberger, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 18 Aug 06, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 31 Oct 06.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Nov 06.
MICHAEL J. NOVEL
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02129
The applicant did not submit evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing that warranted a change to his RE code. The complete HQ AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 4 Aug 06 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). At the time members are separated...
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-2006-02963
He was informed by his commander that there was no guarantee of the job he would receive, but he would most likely be assigned to Security Forces. On 19 Jul 05, he was academically eliminated from the Air Traffic Control course because he failed the Block II, Unit 9 test with a 52% score. Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 11 Oct 06.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02965 INDEX CODE: 110.00, 100.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2C be changed to allow eligibility to reenter the Air Force. He requests additional information be provided concerning his discharge. A complete copy of this response is appended...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01942
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01942 INDEX CODE: 100.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code 2C (Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service) be changed to a better code. They found that the discharge was...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01591
___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial of the applicant’s request. ___________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected by deleting the words “and conduct” from Block 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from...
On 16 Apr 98, he was honorably discharged in the grade of airman (E-2) under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (unsatisfactory performance), with a separation code of “JHJ”. A copy of the AFDRB Hearing Record is appended at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Education and Training Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPAT, stated that after reviewing the applicant’s request, reconsideration of his separation code should be approved. RICHARD A....
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-2006-03100
On 2 Nov 05, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intent to recommend an honorable discharge for unsatisfactory duty performance for failing the Block I test and the Block III test twice. The Medical Consultant states the evidence in the record indicates the applicant had been taking several non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medications. The preponderance of evidence of record shows that the applicant's medical condition (hip pain) was not of sufficient severity to cause academic...
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. ...