RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02927 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 service characterization of service) be changed to allow him to reenter military service. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He did not receive proper preparation from the recruiters as to what was expected of him during the nine week Indoctrination course. The Physical Ability Stamina Test (PAST) was not sufficient in providing what actually occurs in the course. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 28 Dec 10, the applicant commenced his enlistment in the Regular Air Force. In a Self-Initiation Elimination (SIE) Policy Letter dated 13 Ju1 10, the applicant acknowledged that if he self-eliminated from training for any reason that he could be administratively discharged without further counseling/rehabilitation. AETC Form 125A, Record of Administrative Training Action, dated 18 Mar 11, reflects the applicant declined to retry taking the Pararescue Development Course. On 7 Apr 11, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was recommending his discharge from the Air Force for entry-level performance or conduct, specifically reluctance to make the effort necessary to meet Air Force standards of conduct and duty performance. The specific reason for the discharge action was the applicant self-eliminated from the Pararescue Development Course citing he lacked the desire and doubted his ability to complete the course. The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification and waived his right to consult military legal counsel and to submit a statement in his own behalf. On 11 Apr 11, the legal office reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient and recommended the applicant be furnished an entry-level separation. On 13 Apr 11, the discharge authority concurred and directed the applicant be discharged with an entry-level separation. On 19 Apr 11, the applicant was furnished an entry-level separation with uncharacterized service, with an RE code of 2C (Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry- level separation without characterization of service) and an SPD code of JGA, and was credited with 3 months and 22 days of total active service. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. On 29 Aug 12, AFI 36-2606, Reenlistment in the USAF, was changed modifying the RE code 3A to include a definition of first-term airman involuntarily separated (entry- level) for inability to satisfactorily progress in a required training program without characterization of service; or a first- term Airman involuntarily separated for failure to progress in military training required to be qualified for service with the Air Force or for performance of primary duties. The new definition of the RE code 3A was not retroactive. Although DPSOA feels there are equity issues for airman receiving a RE code 2C who were separated for inability to satisfactorily progress in a required training program without characterization of service or failure to progress in military training required to be qualified for service with the Air Force or for performance of primary duties before the new change in the AFI, the applicant was not separated under either of these provisions, but was separated for "reluctance to make the effort necessary to meet Air Force standards of conduct and duty performance" based on self- eliminating from training. The applicant's involuntary separation notification memorandum noted he was removed from training and processed for separation because he self-eliminated from training. Therefore, the applicant’s request should be denied because the AFI in effect at the time of his separation required all airmen being separated with an entry-level separation with uncharacterized service to receive the RE code of 2C. 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 7 Jan 15 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). As of this date, no response has been received by this office. 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. 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-2014-02927 in Executive Session on 19 May 15 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC_2014-02927 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 13 Jul 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 19 Nov 14. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Jan 15.