RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02727 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: YES 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His Reentry (RE) Code of 2C, Separation Program Designator (SPD) 
Code of JGA, and Narrative Reason for Separation (Entry Level 
Performance or Conduct) on his DD Form 214, Certificate of 
Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be changed so he can 
apply to the Air National Guard. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

His separation from his girlfriend while in the Air Force 
affected his motivation and commitment. The decision he made 
was a poor and immature one. Upon separation he was informed 
that he would have the opportunity to reenter the Air Force 
after six months. His RE code of 2C will not allow him to 
reenlist. He never had the opportunity to sign his DD Form 214. 
Had he done so, he would have seen the code was incorrect at the 
time and requested it be corrected. The Reenlistment 
Eligibility Data Display (REDD) Report on him shows an RE Code 
of 3C. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of 
several letters or recommendation, excerpts from ANGI 36-2002, Enlistments and Reenlistments in the Air National Guard (ANG), 
the REDD Report, college academic records, and his DD Form 214. 

 

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

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant entered the Air Force on 21 Aug 07. 

 

On 17 Jan 08, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was 
recommending him for discharge for failure to make satisfactory 
progress in a required training program. The reason for the 
action was his repeated failure of the fourth written 
measurement in his basic Security Forces training program. The 


applicant acknowledged receipt of the action the same day and 
the case was subsequently found to be legally sufficient. 

 

On 28 Jan 08, the discharge authority directed the applicant be 
administratively separated with an entry level separation and, 
on 29 Jan 08, the applicant was furnished an entry-level 
separation with uncharacterized service, was issued and RE Code 
of 2C, an SPD code of JGA, and was credited with five months and 
nine days of total active service. 

 

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of 
primary responsibility (OPR) which are attached at Exhibits C 
and D. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of 
an error or injustice. Based on the documentation on file in 
the master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with 
the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge 
regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge 
authority. The applicant did not submit any evidence or 
identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge 
processing. He provided no facts warranting a change. Airman 
are given entry-level separation with uncharacterized service 
when separation is initiated in the first 180 days of continuous 
active service. The Department of Defense (DoD) determined it 
would be unfair to the member and the service to characterize a 
member’s limited service when separation is initiated within the 
first 180 days of active service. 

 

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial with respect to the applicant’s RE 
Code. The applicant does not provide any evidence that supports 
a correction of his RE code. The applicant states his REDD 
Report has an RE code of 3C and wants his RE code on his DD 214 
changed to 3C also. However, per AFI 36-2606, Reenlistments in 
the USAF, Chapter 3, members cannot separate with an RE code 3C, 
and his RE Code 2C is his correct RE Code. Additionally, the 
active duty Air Force does not use, maintain, or update the REDD 
Report. 

 

A complete copy of the AFPC/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 22 Dec 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 timely filed. 

 

3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. 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 (OPR) and adopt their rationale as the basis for 
our conclusion 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. 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 the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the 
application was denied without a personal appearance; and the 
application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of 
newly discovered relevant evidence not considered with the 
application. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2011-02727 in Executive Session on 1 March 12, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 


The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2011-02727 was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 6 Jul 2011, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSOS, dated 22 Sep 11. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSOA, dated 13 Dec 11. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 Dec 11. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Chair