RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02467 COUNSEL: NO HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her reentry (RE) code of “2C” (Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service) be changed to a code that would allow her to reenlist. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She desires to reenlist. In support of her request, the applicant submits a copy of her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. The applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 10 August 2010. The applicant was notified by her commander on 4 April 2011, of his intent to recommend her discharge from the Air Force under the provisions of AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-3208. The specific reason was the applicant’s failure to perform her assigned duties by not making satisfactory progress in the Aerospace Medical Service Apprentice (Phase I) course. Specifically, she failed the National Registry Emergency Medical Technician written exam four times. As a result of these multiple failures, she was disenrolled from technical training on 7 February 2011. Prior to disenrollment, she was washed back two times, received 39 hours of additional instruction and counseling, and attended classes at the wing Learning and Development Center. These efforts failed to produce positive results. She was advised of her rights in this matter and waived her right to consult with counsel and elected not to submit statements on her own behalf. In a legal review of the case file, the assistant staff judge advocate found the case legally sufficient and recommended discharge. The discharge authority concurred with the recommendation and directed an honorable discharge. The applicant was discharged on 8 April 2011. She served 7 months and 29 days on active duty. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial. DPSOS states based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge, to include the narrative reason for separation, was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge instruction and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. The DPSOS complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial. DPSOA states that the applicant’s RE code 2C is required per AFI 36-2606, Reenlistments in the USAF, chapter 3, based on her involuntary discharge with honorable character of service. The applicant does not provide any evidence of an error or injustice, but only states she wants to join the ANG and the RE code 2C is preventing her from joining. The DPSOA complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 1 November 2011, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). 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 a thorough review of the evidence of record, it is our opinion that given the circumstances surrounding his separation from the Air Force, the RE code assigned was proper and in compliance with the appropriate instructions. In addition, the applicant has not provided any evidence which would lead us to believe that a change to her RE code to allow her to reenlist is warranted. Therefore, we agree with 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. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of an 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-2011-02467 in Executive Session on 4 January 2012, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-02467 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 3 January 2011, w/atch. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 8 September 2011. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 14 October 2011. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 November 2011. Panel Chair