RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01872 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

Her reentry (RE) code of 2C (involuntarily separated with an 
honorable discharge or uncharacterized entry level separation) 
be changed to a code that will allow her to reenlist. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

She was separated due to academics and is unable to join another 
branch of service. 

 

The applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit A. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 21 Jul 09, the applicant entered the Regular Air Force as an 
aerospace medical service apprentice. 

 

On 17 Mar 10, the applicant was notified of pending discharge 
action. Specifically, the commander cited unsatisfactory 
performance as the basis for discharge. The applicant failed 
the National Registry for Emergency Medical Technicians four 
times. Prior to disenrollment, the applicant was washed back, 
received two hours of individual assistance and counseling, and 
attended classes on test-taking and study skills. 

 

On 22 Mar 10, she acknowledged receipt, consulted with counsel, 
and waived her right to submit statements in her own behalf. On 
23 Mar 10, the staff judge advocate found the case legally 
sufficient and recommended discharge. 

 

On 31 Mar 10, the discharge authority concurred and directed 
discharge. The applicant was discharged with an honorable 
discharge for unsatisfactory performance and a RE code of 2C. 
She was credited with eight months and ten days of active 
service. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

 


AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

HQ AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial. DPSOA states the applicant’s 
RE code of 2C is required based on her involuntary discharge 
with an honorable service characterization. Further, she does 
not provide proof of an error or injustice in reference to her 
RE code and only states she wants to rejoin. 

 

The complete HQ AFPC/DPSOA 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 26 Nov 10 for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit D). As of this date, this office has not received a 
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. 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 its 
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. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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-2010-01872 in Executive Session on 3 February 2011, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 
ber 
 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 May 10. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSOA, dated 28 Oct 10. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 Nov 10.