Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01298
Original file (BC-2007-01298.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied


                       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

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01890

    Original file (BC-2003-01890.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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

    Original file (BC-2007-01753.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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

    Original file (BC-2006-02887.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    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

    Original file (BC-2006-03755.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ___________________________________________________________________ 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

    Original file (BC-2003-01351.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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

    Original file (BC-2002-03000.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    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

    Original file (BC-2002-01768.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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

    Original file (BC-2006-02977.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2002 | 0103562

    Original file (0103562.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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

    Original file (BC-2003-00624.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ 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...