RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-04421 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reentry (RE) code of 2C (Entry Level Performance or Conduct) be changed so he can reenlist in the United States Air Force and serve his country with honor. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The RE code he was given was excessive and severe in the context of his given situation. His age and maturity affected his decision and he is asking for a second chance. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 1 Oct 13. On 10 Dec 13, the applicant self-eliminated from training on the second day of the Combat Control Selection course because he got engaged and felt he wasn’t right for that career field anymore. On 6 Feb 14, the applicant’s commander notified him he was recommending his discharge with an entry level separation (ELS) for unsatisfactory performance or conduct, specifically, reluctance to make the effort necessary to meet Air Force standards of conduct and duty performance. On 6 Feb 14, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the action and of his right to consult with legal counsel and submit statements on his own behalf. The applicant did not waive his right to consult with legal counsel. On 7 Feb 14, the applicant submitted a statement on his behalf about why he should be reclassified in the Air Force or receive a RE code that would allow him to reenter another branch of the military. On 20 Feb 14, the discharge was found to be legally sufficient. On 25 Feb 14, the applicant was discharged with an uncharacterized character of service and was credited with 4 months, and 25 days of active service. On 31 Oct 14, a request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit C). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memoranda prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibits D and E. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. Prior to his disenrollment, the applicant was counseled about his decision to self-eliminate from the course. The applicant stated that he became engaged to his longtime girlfriend and he wanted to start a family. He indicated that if he remained in the combat control career field, he would be deployed often which would be a detriment to his future family. As a result, the commander determined that discharge was in order. Therefore, the separation code (SPD) and narrative reason for separation were issued correctly as indicated on the applicant's DD Form 214. The applicant's service characterization was also issued in accordance with AFI 36-3208, Administration Separation of Airmen, correctly as indicated on his DD Form 214. Airmen are given entry-level separation/uncharacterized service characterization when separation is initiated in the first 180 days continuous active service. The Department of Defense (DoD) determined if a member served less than 180 days continuous active service, it would be unfair to the member and the service to characterize their limited service. Therefore, the uncharacterized character of service on his DD Form 214 is correct and in accordance with DoD and Air Force instructions. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit D. 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." Although we feel there are equity issues for Airman receiving a RE code 2C who were separated before 29 Aug 12 for an "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," applicant was not separated under either of these provisions. The applicant 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. Per the applicant's involuntary separation notification memorandum (dated 6 Feb 14) he was removed from training and processed for separation because he self-eliminated from training. The applicant was not separated under either provision authorizing the use of the new RE code 3A definition and the RE code 2C is the correct RE code. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit E. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 25 Feb 15, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit F). 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 opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR) and adopt their 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-2014-04421 in Executive Session on 9 Jul 15, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-04421 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 27 Oct 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 31 Oct 14. Exhibit D. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 20 Nov 14. Exhibit E. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 15 Dec 14. Exhibit F. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Feb 15.