RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

 AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-03505 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His entry level separation and his reentry (RE) code of 2C 
(involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry 
level separation without characterization of service) be 
changed. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

At the time of his enlistment, he did not have much 
understanding of the English language. He struggled speaking 
and understanding it. He failed a test in basic military 
training (BMT) and subsequently failed two tests in technical 
school, which resulted in his discharge. He is confident that 
his knowledge of the English language has increased and has a 
better understanding of it. 

 

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a copy of his 
DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active 
Duty, issued in conjunction with his 12 Jan 04 separation. 

 

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

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force, on 5 Aug 03, 
for a period of six years, in the grade of airman basic (E1/AB). 

 

On 30 Dec 03, the commander initiated administrative discharge 
action against the applicant for entry-level performance or 
conduct. The reasons for the proposed action were based on the 
applicant’s failure to make satisfactory progress in a required 
training program. He was eliminated from the Security Forces 
Apprentice training course for unsatisfactory performance after 
failing Test 1, Version B, Retest of Test 1, Version A, and 
Retest of Test 1, Version C, with scores of 62%, 66% and 62% 
respectively. The minimum passing score was 70%. Prior to 
disenrollment, the applicant was counseled concerning his 


performance, was washed back twice and received four hours of 
Special Individualized Assistance (SIA). Efforts to improve his 
performance were met with negative results. On that same date, 
the applicant waived his right to counsel and to submit 
statements in his own behalf. The deputy chief, adverse actions 
found the case file legally sufficient and the discharge 
authority directed discharge with an entry-level separation, 
without probation and rehabilitation. 

 

On 12 Jan 04, the applicant received an uncharacterized entry-
level separation, with a reason for separation of entry level 
performance and conduct, and was issued an RE code of 2C. 
He was credited with five months and eight days of active duty 
service. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial, stating, in part, based on the 
documentation on file in the applicant’s master personnel 
record, the applicant had difficulty with the English language, 
which led to him not understanding of the security forces 
course. They found the discharge, to include the reason for 
separation, was appropriately administered and within the 
discretion of the discharge authority. The applicant did not 
provide any evidence or identify any errors or injustices in the 
discharge processing, warranting a change to his narrative 
reason for separation and separation code. 

 

Additionally, they noted that airmen are given entry-level 
separation/uncharacterized service characterization when the 
separation is initiated in the first 180 days of continuous 
active service. The Department of Defense (DoD) determined that 
if a member served less than 180 days continuous service, it 
would be unfair to the member and the service to characterize 
their limited service. The uncharacterized service, which 
resulted in the RE code of 2C, is appropriate and in accordance 
with DoD and Air Force instructions. 

 

The complete AFPC/DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial, stating, in part, the applicant 
received the reentry code of 2C based on his entry level 
separation, with uncharacterized service. They noted the 
applicant failed to demonstrate any error or injustice. 

 

The complete AFPC/DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 


Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the 
applicant on 25 Mar 11 for review and comment within 30 days. 
As of this date, no response has been received by this office 
(Exhibit E). 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 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 office 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. 
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find 
no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this 
application. 

 

4. Notwithstanding the above, sufficient relevant evidence has 
been presented to demonstrate the existence of an injustice 
warranting a change in the reason for separation. As noted 
above, we believe the separation action taken against the 
applicant was in accordance with the applicable instruction. 
However, after a thorough review of the facts and circumstances 
of this case, we find the narrative reason for his separation; 
i.e., entry level performance and conduct, to be overly harsh. 
The available evidence indicates it was the applicant’s academic 
deficiency that ultimately resulted in his separation, and not 
any misconduct. Therefore, in order to correct the injustice of 
improperly labeling the applicant, his narrative reason for 
separation should be corrected to accurately reflect the 
circumstances of his separation. Accordingly, we recommend the 
applicant’s records be corrected by deleting the words “and 
conduct” from his narrative reason for separation. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 Active 
Duty, issued as a result of his entry level separation on 
12 January 2004. 

 


________________________________________________________________ 

 

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2010-03505 in Executive Session on 28 June 2011, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The 
following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 10 Sep 10, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 27 Jan 11. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 14 Feb 11. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Mar 11. 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair