RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05473 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reentry (RE) code of 2C (Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service) be revised to allow him reentry into military service. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His RE code of 2C is unjust because he is still young, healthy, and has a lot more that he can give to his country. He made a mistake by not asking for extra help or studying more, causing his failure of three block tests. This mistake cost him a career in the Air Force. He would like a second chance to call himself a United States airman because he is now older, wiser, and has his priorities in order. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant’s military personnel records indicate he enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 29 Aug 06. On 13 Dec 06, a squadron academic review board convened and surmised the applicant did not have the ability to retain information based on his scores/history and his verbalization that he no longer wanted to be in the Air Force and would not give one hundred percent. On 3 Jan 07, the applicant’s commander notified him that she was recommending his discharge from the Air Force for entry level performance or conduct. Specifically, he failed to make satisfactory progress in a required training program. The reason for the action included three block test failures during technical training. On 3 Jan 07, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the action, indicated he consulted counsel, and submitted a statement for consideration. On 5 Jan 07, the case was found legally sufficient. On 10 Jan 07, the discharge authority directed the applicant be furnished an entry level separation. On 12 Jan 07, the applicant was furnished an entry-level separation with uncharacterized service with a narrative reason for separation of “Entry Level Performance and Conduct,” and was issued a RE code of 2C (Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service) and separation program designator (SPD) code of JGA (entry-level performance and conduct). He was credited with 4 months and 14 days of total active service. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial. The RE code 2C is based on the applicant’s entry level separation with uncharacterized service. Furthermore, he does not provide any evidence of an error or injustice in reference to his RE code. A complete copy of the 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 12 Sep 14 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D). 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. 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 (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief. 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 this application. The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-05473 in Executive Session on 28 Oct 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 18 Nov 13, w/atch. Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 28 Jan 14. Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 Sep 14.