RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	  DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01216
		  	  COUNSEL:  NONE
    	 		 HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1. Her Reentry (RE) Code, 2C which denotes, Involuntarily 
separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation 
without characterization of service, be changed to allow 
reenlistment in the armed forces.  

2. Her narrative reason for separation of “Unsatisfactory 
Performance and Conduct” be changed.  

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her involuntary separation and RE code was the result of one 
incident in which she did not successfully complete an assigned 
briefing.  This was an injustice as she successfully completed 
other assignments and Basic Military Training (BMT).  She 
realized she was not a good fit for the Intelligence Operations 
Air Force Specialty as she had a fear of briefing.

In support of her request, the applicant provides a personal 
statement and copies of Department of Defense (DOD) Form 293, 
Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of 
the United States, and DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or 
Discharge from Active Duty.    

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 18 May 2004, the applicant entered active duty.

On 21 Sep 2004, she was notified by her commander that she was 
being recommended for discharge from the Air Force for Entry 
Level Separation in accordance with Air Force Instruction            
36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airman.  The specific 
reason for this action was on 13 Sep 2004, the applicant was 
disenrolled from the Intelligence Operations Apprentice training 
course for academic reason. 

On 23 Sep 2004, the applicant acknowledged the discharge action, 
consulted legal counsel and waived her right to submit 
statements in her behalf.

On 24 Sep 2004, the staff judge advocate determined the 
discharge action was legally sufficient.

On 4 Oct 2004, the applicant was discharged with RE code 2C and 
a narrative reason for separation of “Unsatisfactory Performance 
and Conduct.”

The applicant served 4 months and 17 days on active duty.   

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial of her request to change her 
narrative reason for separation.  A review of the applicant’s 
military personnel records show 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 of an error or injustice in the 
processing of her discharge warranting a change to her character 
of service, separation code or narrative reason for separation.  
In accordance with AFI 36-3208, airmen are in entry level status 
during the first 180 days of continuous military service.  The 
applicant’s discharge record reflects she was counseled and 
afforded an opportunity to overcome her academic deficiencies.  
The applicant’s continued lack of desire to be in the 
Intelligence Operations Apprentice career field led to the 
recommendation of discharge.  

The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C.

DPSOA recommends denial of her request to change her RE code.  
The RE code 2C is required based on the entry level separation 
with an uncharacterized character of service as dictated by AFI 
36-2606, Reenlistments in the United States Air Force.  
Moreover, the applicant did not provide any evidence of an error 
or injustice in the discharge processing. 

The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D.  

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

She is disappointed but not discouraged.  She expressed her 
concerns to the best of her ability and tried to give an 
accurate account of the events that led to her separation.  She 
would like to challenge this pending decision but was advised 
that delaying the case for more evidence would not be 
persuasive.

She would like to apologize to the members of the Air Force for 
her behavior which warranted such a negative code.  It was not 
her intention to come across defiant or disrespectful. She 
understands the reasoning for this decision and has decided that 
if she has to live with this negative code then so be it.  She 
thanks the Air Force for the opportunity to serve her country, 
though it was a brief time.

The applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit F.  

_________________________________________________________________

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 an error or injustice warranting a 
change of her RE code.  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.   Therefore, in the absence of 
evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to grant the 
requested relief.    

4.  Notwithstanding the above, sufficient relevant evidence has 
been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or an 
injustice warranting partial relief.  In this respect, we note 
that the applicant’s entry level separation was for academic 
reasons and not misconduct.  For this reason and to prevent a 
further burden with the stigma associated with her narrative 
reason for separation of “Unsatisfactory Performance and 
Conduct, we recommend that it be changed to "Secretarial 
Authority."  Accordingly, in the interest of justice, we 
recommend her record be corrected to the extent indicated below. 

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
      
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air 
Force relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show that at the 
time of her 4 Oct 2004 discharge, the narrative reason for her 
separation was Secretarial Authority with a separation code of 
“JFF.” 



The following members of the Board considered Docket Number   
BC-2013-01216 in Executive Session on 9 Jan 2014, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	 , Panel Chair
	 , Member
	 , Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 3 Mar 2013, w/atch.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. 
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 23 Apr 2013.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 15 May 2013.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 May 2013.
     Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated 28 May 2013.
      
    



 
							PANEL CHAIR