RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02996 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reentry (RE) code of 2C, which denotes “Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service”, be changed to 1A, which denotes “ineligible to reenlist, but condition waived.” _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 1. He was given a general (under honorable conditions) discharge; however he appealed to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) to upgrade his character of service to honorable, to change his narrative reason for separation and reentry (RE) code. 2. The AFDRB upgraded his character of service and changed his narrative reason for separation; however, they denied the request to change his RE code. Since his discharge was upgraded, he should be eligible to reenlist in any branch of the armed services. 3. He has obtained a Bachelor’s degree, so he can be a better asset to the branch he chooses. In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty and a memorandum. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 12 Oct 04, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force. On 18 Jun 05, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intent to recommend that he be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFPD 36-32, Air Force Military Training and AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, paragraph 5.52.3, Other Serious Offenses. The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge, waived his option to consult counsel and his right to submit a statement on his own behalf. The specific reason for this action was: Between on or about 4 Mar 05 and on or about 28 Mar 05, the applicant reconstructed the National Registry of Emergency Medical Technicians test from his memory or the memory of others. For this misconduct, he received non-judicial (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); forfeiture of $728 pay per month for two months; seven days extra duty suspended until 6 Dec 05, after which time it would have been remitted without further action unless sooner vacated; and a reprimand. On 19 Jul 05, the case file was reviewed and determined to be legally sufficient to support separation. The Deputy Staff Judge Advocate recommended to the 882 Training Group Commander the applicant be discharged and issued a general (under honorable conditions) discharge without probation and rehabilitation. On 20 Jul 05, the discharge authority approved the applicant’s discharge. On 21 Jul 05, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge in the grade of airman first class. He served 9 months and 10 days of total active service. On 19 Feb 07, the applicant filed an appeal to the AFDRB to upgrade his character of service to honorable, to change the narrative reason for separation and reentry code. On 13 Dec 07, the applicant appeared and testified before the AFDRB with counsel. The Board concluded that while the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation, the discharge action was too harsh in light of the surrounding circumstances. In view of the foregoing findings, the Board concluded the characterization of the applicant’s discharge was more accurately described as honorable. The applicant’s characterization was changed to honorable and the reason for discharge waschanged to Secretarial Authority. However, the Board concluded the applicant’s RE code should remain unchanged. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial. Although the AFDRB denied the applicant a reenlistment eligible RE code, his RE code was changed to 2C, “Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service” based on his new character of service to honorable. The applicant’s RE code 2C is required per AFI 36-2606, Reenlistments in the United States Air Force, chapter 3, based on his involuntary discharge with an honorable character of service. The applicant does not provide any evidence of an error or injustice, but states “If I was awarded an honorable discharge then why cannot I be eligible to reenlist in any branch but the Army?” The applicant seems to believe an honorable character of service means a member should be reenlistment eligible, which is not the case. The complete 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 5 Oct 11 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). As of this date, this office has not received a 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 opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its 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. 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 our understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. ________________________________________________________________ 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-2011-02996 in Executive Session on 29 Mar 12, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 Aug 11, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOA, Letter, dated 5 Oct 11. Exhibit D. SAF/MRBR, Letter, dated 29 Oct 11.