RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-01298
INDEX CODE: 100.06
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 13 NOV 08
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of “2C” be changed.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
When he initially took his skill level test, he did not apply himself
and failed the test. Even though he studied every night until he
tested a second time, he still failed the test with the same score of
his initial failure. He did not believe that was coincidental.
However, other than the score, he was never shown his tests results.
He was subsequently discharged. He is mature now and has the
responsibility of a family. He believes rejoining the Air Force would
be beneficial to them.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provided a personal statement.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 28 Nov 90 for a
period of four years in the grade of airman basic.
On 22 Apr 92, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was
recommending the applicant be discharged for unsatisfactory
performance based on his failure to progress in on-the-job training
(OJT). The reasons for this action were as follows:
a. On or about 14 Jan 92, he failed his end of course
examination as evidenced by ECI Form 9, dated 14 Jan 92.
b. On or about 31 Mar 92, he failed his end of course
examination as evidenced by ECI Form 9, dated 31 Mar 92.
The applicant was advised of his rights in the matter and that an
honorable discharge would be recommended.
On 29 Apr 92, the office of the Staff Judge Advocate found the
discharge case file was legally sufficient and recommended the
applicant be furnished an honorable discharge. The discharge
authority approved the discharge action and directed the applicant be
honorably discharged.
On 4 May 92, the applicant was honorably discharged under the
provisions of AFR 39-10 (Unsatisfactory Performance) in the grade of
airman first class and assigned an RE code of “2C” (Involuntarily
separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation
without characterization of service). He was credited with one year,
five months, and seven days of active service.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPAE recommends denial indicating that they found no evidence of
an error or injustice. The applicant’s commander cited his Career
Development Course (CDC) failures as the reason for his discharge and
the applicant did, in fact, fail his CDCs. The RE code for his
separation was 2C.
A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 15
Jun 07 for review and response 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 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 error or injustice. We note the Secretary of the Air
Force has statutory authority to promulgate rules and regulations
governing the administration of the Air Force. In the exercise of
that authority, the Secretary has determined that members separated
from the Air Force would be furnished an RE code predicated upon the
quality of their service and circumstances of their separation. The
evidence of record indicates the applicant was involuntarily
discharged for unsatisfactory performance. As a result, he was
assigned an RE code of 2C. It appears the applicant’s RE code was
appropriately assigned and accurately reflected the circumstances of
his separation, and, we find no evidence to indicate the assigned RE
code was in error. In view of the foregoing, and in the absence of
evidence to the contrary, we conclude that no basis exists to
recommend favorable action on the applicant’s request that his RE code
of 2C be changed.
4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been
shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will
materially add to our understanding of the issues involved.
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.
_________________________________________________________________
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-
2007-01298 in Executive Session on 15 Aug 07, under the provisions of
AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Michael J. Novel, Panel Chair
Mr. Reginald P. Howard, Member
Ms. Patricia R. Collins, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 10 May 07, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 22 May 07.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Jun 07.
MICHAEL J. NOVEL
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01890
We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case, however; we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 9 Jul 03. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Jul 03.
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-01753
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-01753 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 8 DECEMBER 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed from “2C” which denotes "Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service" to an...
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-2006-03755
___________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 19 Aug 03 for a period of six years. On 27 Aug 05, applicant was honorably discharged under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, by reason of “Unsatisfactory Performance,” and was issued an RE code of 2C. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01351
He received a letter of counseling (LOC) on 17 October 2001 for being late for duty. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant's submission, we are not persuaded that his contention of no longer being affected by “previous flaws”, in and by themselves, are sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air Force. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 8 May 03.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03000
She served 2 years, 2 months and 13 days of active service. The AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPAE stated that the Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of 2C, “Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service” is correct. However, after reviewing the applicant’s records, the Board believes the narrative reason for separation and her current RE code are somewhat harsh.
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-01768
At the time she was released, she took her end of course exams twice and failed both times due to working 12 hour days and suffering a miscarriage. 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 offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. ...
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...
The commander was recommending that applicant receive an honorable discharge. In an effort to study and pass the second final testing, he and his trainer reviewed the CDC course material. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluations and provided letters of recommendation, a letter from his congressman, an application for an Air Force Reserve position, and a letter from the...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00624
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was trying to find a way to get out of the service to spend time with his grandfather and mother after his grandmother died. The First Sergeant assured the applicant that he would be honorably discharged. The applicant was notified on 12 August 1994 that he was being recommended for discharge under the auspices of Air Force Regulation (AFR) 39-10, Unsatisfactory Performance - Failure to Progress...