RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02657 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His separation code of “JKN” (Misconduct) be changed. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He signed his discharge paperwork with the understanding that it 
was for Force Shaping. His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release 
or Discharge from Active Duty, reflects he received an 
administrative discharge. He received a general (under honorable 
conditions) discharge and believes that if it was for misconduct 
he would not have received the administrative discharge. He did 
not leave the military under bad terms and would like his record 
to show that so he can reenlist at the earliest time possible. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of his 
DD Form 214. 

 

His complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant enlisted into the Regular Air Force on 22 May 01 
and was progressively promoted to the grade of senior airman, 
having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 
19 Jun 04. He received a general (under honorable conditions) on 
24 Nov 04 after serving 3 years, 6 months, and 3 days on active 
duty; however, the DD Form 214 he was furnished reflects his 
narrative reason for separation as “administrative discharge” and 
his reentry (RE) code as “3C” (First-term airman not yet 
considered under the SRP) when it should have been annotated as a 
“2B” (Separated with a general or under-other-than-honorable-
conditions discharge). The applicant’s AF Form 100, Request and 
Authorization for Separation, reflects the correct separation 
code of “JKN.” 

 

 

Additional relevant facts pertaining to this application, 
extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in 


the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force. 
Accordingly, there is no need to recite these facts in this 
Record of Proceedings. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial. DPSOS states the applicant was 
disapproved for Force Shaping, Phase II program, since he was 
pending an administrative discharge. The applicant was approved 
for separation for misconduct (minor infractions) with an 
effective date of 24 Nov 04. DPSOS notes the applicant’s 
DD [sic] Form 100 reflects the wrong separation date; however, 
they will amend the form. DPSOS states the applicant did not 
provide any evidence to show that an error or injustice occurred 
in the processing of his discharge that would warrant a change of 
his separation code. 

 

The DPSOS complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial. DPSOA states the applicant’s 
DD Form 214 requires to be updated IAW the governing regulation 
to reflect the appropriate RE code of “2B” to coincide with his 
general (UHC) discharge. 

 

The DPSOA complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the 
applicant on 11 Feb 11 for review and comment within 30 days. 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 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 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 and adopt 
their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the 
applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. 

 
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no 
basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this 
application. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: 

 

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that 
the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 
that 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-2010-02657 in Executive Session on 15 Mar 11, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 


 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 Jul 10, w/atch. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 13 Jan 11. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 27 Jan 11. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Feb 11.