Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04585
Original file (BC-2011-04585.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04585 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His reentry (RE) code of “2C” which denotes “Involuntarily 
separated with an honorable discharge; or entry-level separation 
without characterization” be changed to allow him to reenlist in 
the Armed Forces. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He was discharged prior to completing 180 days of active duty 
service, resulting in uncharacterized service. He was 
disqualified for further service for six months and did not have 
bad conduct. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of his 
DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active 
Duty; and AF Form 100, Request and Authorization for Separation. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 11 May 10, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force. 

 

On 23 Jul 10, the applicant self-eliminated from the Pararescue 
Indoctrination Course. As a result, he was removed from the 
course. On 3 Aug 10, the Military Training Flight (MTF) 
commander recommended he be eliminated from the PJ/CRO 
Indoctrination Course and reclassified in accordance with (IAW) 
Air Force policy. 

 

On 6 Aug 10, the Training Group commander approved the 
applicant’s elimination and recommended he be discharged. 

 

On 1 Sep 10, the commander notified the applicant that he was 
being discharged from the Air Force for entry-level performance 
or conduct under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, Administrative 
Separation of Airmen. The reason for the proposed action was 
the applicant’s reluctance to make the effort necessary to meet 
Air Force Standards of conduct and duty performance. The 
applicant acknowledged receipt of the discharge notification and 


waived his right to consult with counsel, and to submit a 
statement is his own behalf. 

 

On 16 Sep 11, the Assistant Staff Judge Advocate found the case 
legally sufficient to support the separation. On 20 Sep 10, 
the discharge authority approved the separation. 

 

On 27 Nov 10, the applicant received an uncharacterized entry-
level separation, with a separation code of JGA which denotes 
“Entry Level Performace or Conduct” and was issued an RE code of 
2C. He served on active duty for a period of 4 months and 
17 days. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial. DPSOS states that based on the 
documentation on file in the master personnel records, the 
discharge to include the service characterization, was 
appropriately administered and within the discretion of the 
discharge authority. The applicant did not provide any evidence 
that an error or injustice occurred in the discharge processing 
warranting his return to the Armed Forces. 

 

Since the applicant was only on active duty for 139 days when 
the discharge action was initiated he was separated with an 
entry-level separation IAW AFI 36-3208. The applicant was 
counseled and was afforded the opportunity to overcome his 
deficiencies. 

 

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

 

The complete DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the 
applicant on 12 Mar 12 for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit D). 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 an error or injustice. After 
careful consideration of the circumstances of this case and the 
evidence provided by the applicant, we are not persuaded the 
applicant's reentry code is in error or unjust. Therefore, we 
agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force 
office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the 
basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim 
of an error or injustice. In the absence of evidence to the 
contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief 
sought in this application. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 Docket Number 
BC-2011-04585 in Executive Session on 14 Aug 12, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 Panel Chair 

 Member 

 Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 25 Oct 11, w/atch. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 7 Mar 12. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 Mar 12. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair 

 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04596

    Original file (BC-2010-04596.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04596 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty be corrected as follows: 1. On 9 Nov 10, the applicant was discharged with an uncharacterized entry-level separation, for entry level performance or conduct, and was issued RE code...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03703

    Original file (BC-2011-03703.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03703 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His uncharacterized discharge be changed to an honorable discharge and his reentry (RE) code of 2C (entry-level separation with uncharacterized service) be changed to an RE code that would allow his immediate reenlistment. Therefore, his character of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04645

    Original file (BC-2010-04645.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04645 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: While it is not readily apparent, it appears as though the applicant is requesting that his entry-level separation with uncharacterized service be upgraded to an honorable discharge, and his Reentry (RE) code of 2C (Entry level separation...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04872

    Original file (BC-2011-04872.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The complete AFPC/DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D. AETC/SGPS notes the applicant’s separation was carried out in accordance with established policy and administrative procedures; however, they support changing the RE code should the Board grant the request. The complete AETC/SGPS evaluation is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: While he understands the basis for the decision the Air Force took at the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04436

    Original file (BC-2011-04436.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    DPSOS states that based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge, to include the service characterization was appropriately administered and within the discretion of the discharge authority. The complete DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 4 Sep 12 for review and comment within 15...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02404

    Original file (BC-2007-02404.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-02404 INDEX CODE: 100.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment code of 2C, “involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service,” be changed to 3A, “first-term airman who separated before completing 36...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02487

    Original file (BC-2007-02487.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    The type of his separation be changed from entry-level separation to a medical discharge. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice regarding the applicant’s request that his uncharacterized service be changed to an honorable discharge, his RE code of 2C be changed, his entry level separation be changed to a medical discharge, and his records be corrected to reflect his eligibility for unemployment compensation. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03997

    Original file (BC-2011-03997.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    ECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03997 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reentry (RE) Code be changed from a 2C, which denotes “Involuntary separation with honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service”, to one that will allow him to reenlist. On 12 May 11, the applicant was notified...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-03505

    Original file (BC-2010-03505.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    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. 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. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04623

    Original file (BC-2011-04623.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial. DPSOS states that based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge to include the service characterization, was appropriately administered and within the discretion of the discharge authority. After careful consideration of the circumstances of this case and the evidence provided by the applicant, we are not persuaded the applicant's...