RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02685 

COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His reentry (RE) code of “2C” (involuntarily separated with an 
honorable discharge; or entry level separation without 
characterization of service) be changed to allow him to reenter 
the Air National Guard (ANG). 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He never had any discrepancies in the military, other than 
failing his second test in Technical Training School. He wishes 
to join the ANG and to continue to serve his country. 

 

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a copy of his 
Air Force Information Management Tool 100, Request and 
Authorization for Separation. 

 

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at 
Exhibit A. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force, who 
entered active duty on 12 January 2010 in the grade of airman 
basic (E-1). According to his discharge file, he was discharged 
effective 28 May 2010, for failing to perform his assigned duties 
by not making satisfactory progress in the Ophthalmic Apprentice 
course. He received an uncharacterized entry-level separation 
with an RE code “2C” and a narrative reason for separation of 
“Entry Level Performance and Conduct.” He served 4 months and 
17 days on active duty. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial. DPSOS states 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, 
the uncharacterized service, which resulted in the applicant 
receiving an RE code of “2C” is correct and in accordance with 
DoD and Air Force Instructions. 

 

DPSOS indicates that based on the documentation on file in the 
master personnel records, the discharge was appropriately 
administered and was within the discretion of the discharge 
authority. The applicant did not submit any evidence or identify 
any error or injustice that occurred in the discharge processing. 

 

The complete DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial. DPSOA states the applicant’s RE 
code of “2C” is required per Air Force Instruction 36-2606, Reenlistments in the USAF, chapter 3, based on his entry-level 
separation with uncharacterized service. The applicant has not 
provided proof of an error or injustice in reference to his RE 
code. 

 

DPSOA indicates that each component of the military determines 
their own eligibility criteria for accepting prior service 
personnel back into the service and have the right to change 
their criteria at anytime to meet their individual needs. It is 
not the RE code that is preventing the applicant from being 
eligible for reentry, but each components policy in reference to 
RE codes. Circumventing the current screening policies of the 
military by changing the applicant’s RE code would not be 
appropriate. The Air Force active duty component currently can 
waive RE code “2C” for members who were separated for academic 
failure, if they meet all other prior service reentry 
requirements. 

 

The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant 
on 14 January 2011, for review and comment within 30 days. As of 
this date, this office has received no response. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 in regard to the 
applicant’s request for a change to his RE code. We find the RE 
code which was issued at the time of the applicant’s separation 
accurately reflects the circumstances of his separation and we do 
not find this code to be in error or unjust. Therefore, we 
recommend the applicant’s request be denied. Nevertheless, we 
believe that based on the total circumstances of this case a 
measure of relief is warranted. We note that while the discharge 
action taken against the applicant and the characterization of 
service he was given were in accordance with the applicable 
instruction, the narrative reason for his entry-level separation; 
i.e., entry-level performance and conduct, does not accurately 
reflect the reason for the applicant’s separation. We note that 
the word “conduct” could be misconstrued to infer that the 
applicant’s separation for academic deficiency was also due to 
misconduct. While the applicant may have had problems 
progressing in the required technical training courses, the 
evidence of record does not reflect any misconduct. Therefore, 
in the interest of justice, we believe the narrative reason for 
separation should be corrected to remove the words “and conduct.” 
We believe with this correction the applicant’s record will more 
accurately reflect the real reason for his separation. 
Therefore, we recommend the applicant’s records be corrected as 
indicated below. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: 

 

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force 
relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that the words “and 
conduct” be deleted from Block 28 (Narrative Reason for 
Separation) on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or 
Discharge from Active Duty. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2010-02685 in Executive Session on 19 April 2011, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 


All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The 
following documentary evidence for AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-
02685 was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 Jul 10, with atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 4 Nov 10. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 1 Dec 10. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Jan 11. 

 


 Panel Chair