RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2017-02939

  	COUNSEL: NONE
	
	HEARING: YES

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His 2C (Involuntary separation with honorable discharge) Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed to allow him to reenter the military.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He believes it was appropriate to be discharged at the time, but now feels he is able to serve the country.  He believes it to be unjust to receive the 2C RE code for failure of only 2 tests in a 6 month period.  The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is a former member of the Air Force.  

On 27 Apr 11, the commander notified the applicant of his  intent to discharge him under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airman, paragraph 5.26.1 for Unsatisfactory Performance.  For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B and the advisory at Exhibit C.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DP2SSM recommends denying the application.  The applicant contends that his prior discharge was right, but believes the RE code 2C is unjust for failing 2 tests in a 6 month period.  

On 27 Apr 2011, the applicant’s commander directed he be discharged under AFI 36-3208 paragraph 5.26.1 for Unsatisfactory Performance. Although the specific subparagraph of 5.26.1.1. Failure to perform assigned duties properly, 5.26.1.2. A progressively downward trend in performance ratings, or 5.26.1.3. Failure to demonstrate the qualities of leadership required by the member's grade, was not identified, none of them would allow for a deviation from the RE code 2C which is based on the involuntary discharge with an honorable character of service.   The complete advisory is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Board sent a copy of the Air Force evaluation to the applicant on 12 Mar 18 for comment (Exhibit D), but has received no response.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The application was not timely filed.

2.  The applicant exhausted all available avenues of non-judicial relief before applying to the Board.

3.   After thoroughly reviewing all Exhibits, it is the Board’s opinion that the applicant is not the victim of an error or injustice.  The Board concurs with the rationale and recommendation of AFPC/DP2STM and AFPC/DP2SSM and finds that a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions.  The Board also notes the applicant did not file the application within three years after the alleged error or injustice was discovered, or should have been discovered, as required by Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552, and Air Force Instruction 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR).  Moreover, the applicant has offered no plausible reason for the delay in filing the application.  The Board finds the application untimely and concludes it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the delay.  Therefore, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s records. 

4.  The applicant’s case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to the Board’s understanding of the issue involved.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The applicant be informed the application was not timely filed; it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the delay; and the application will only be reconsidered upon receipt of relevant evidence not already considered by the Board.

The application was adjudicated without a personal appearance.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The applicant be informed the application was not timely filed; it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the delay; and the application will only be reconsidered upon receipt of relevant evidence not already considered by the Board.

CERTIFICATION:

The following quorum of the Board, as defined in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), paragraph 1.5, considered Docket Number BC-2017-02939 in Executive Session on 30 May 18:

All members voted not to correct the record.  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 21 Jun 17.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Advisory opinion, AFPC/DP2SSM, dated 23 Oct 17.
Exhibit D:	Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 12 Mar 18.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9 pertaining to Docket Number BC-2017-02939.