RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01779 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reentry (RE) code “3K” (Reserved for use by AFPC or the AFBCMR when no other reenlistment eligibility code applies or is appropriate) be changed to “1M”, “1P” or “1Q” to allow reentry into the military. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His discharge was unwarranted and unfair. He admits what happened was his fault and accepts the consequences; however, the punishment did not fit the crime. He was never afforded an opportunity to explain what actually happened. He repeatedly asked leadership to hold off punishment until his civilian case was completed. His ultimate goal is to return to military service. In support of his request, the applicant submits a character statement from a coworker, a volunteer letter from a local food bank, education records, and a chronological case summary and immigration paperwork on his family members. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 22 Jul 08. On 6 Feb 13, the applicant received a Letter of Reprimand for Unprofessional Conduct as cited by the Tucson Police Department for driving under the influence of alcohol in an extreme degree. On 18 Mar 13, the applicant’s commander demoted him from Senior Airman to Airman First Class with a new date of rank of 25 Feb 13 in accordance with AFI 36-2502, Airman Promotion/Demotion Programs, Chapter 6, paragraph 6.3. On 10 May 13, the applicant’s commander notified him of intent to discharge him in accordance with AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, Chapter 5, paragraph 5.52.3. The basis for discharge was Misconduct. The Staff Judge Advocate reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient to separate the applicant and the discharge authority approved a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge for misconduct. On 05 Jun 13, the applicant was furnished a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge, and was credited with 4 years, 10 months, and 14 days of active service. On 10 Jul 13, the applicant submitted an application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of the United States. On 3 Oct 13, the Air Force Discharge Review Board concluded there was sufficient mitigation to substantiate upgrading the applicant’s discharge. As such, the board granted upgrade of discharge to Honorable, change of reason and authority for discharge and change of reenlistment code. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. The applicant was involuntarily discharged for misconduct on 5 Jun 13 with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) character of service. He received a RE code “2B” (Separated with a general or under other than honorable conditions discharge), based on his General discharge. At some point, the applicant’s RE code was changed to “3K” (Reserved for use by AFPC or the AFBCMR when no other RE code applies or is appropriate) and his narrative reason for separation was changed to “Secretarial Authority”. All three requested RE codes state in bold “Do not separate Airman with this RE code” They are reserved for Airmen that have been selected under SRP; however, the applicant was not selected for reenlistment, he was involuntarily discharged. 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 29 Sep 14 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. The Air Force Discharge Review Board’s action provided the applicant appropriate relief on this matter. 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-2014-01779 in Executive Session on 13 Jan 15 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 25 Apr 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 4 May 14. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Sep 14.