RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-04705

  						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, block 27, reentry code 2B be removed.  In rebuttal, the applicant requests his reentry (RE) code be changed from 2B to 3K.  

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His current reentry code is preventing him from joining the Air Force Reserve.  

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 18 Jun 13.

On 13 Jan 14, the applicant received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for underage drinking.  

On 27 Jan 14, the applicant received a LOR for failing a dorm room inspection and driving recklessly.

On 4 Feb 14, the applicant received a Letter of Counseling (LOC) for failing to notify his supervisor he was ill and was going to be late for work.

On 12 Mar 14, the applicant received a Letter of Admonishment (LOA) for being late for work and failing to notify his supervisor.

On 24 Apr 14, the applicant received a LOR for failure to go.  Additionally, an Unfavorable Information File was established.  

On 14 Aug 14, the applicant received a LOR for reckless driving and causing damage to a privately owned vehicle.  

On 14 Oct 14, the applicant received a LOC for dereliction in the performance of duties.  In his rebuttal, the applicant noted several discrepancies in the incident report and stated his belief his leadership is attempting to single him out.  

On 4 Nov 14, the applicant was notified by his commander his intent to recommend his discharge from the United States Air Force for misconduct: minor disciplinary infractions and an under honorable conditions (general) service characterization.  The applicant provided a response after consulting counsel asking for reconsideration and a chance to redeem himself.  He further stated the hostile work environment became overwhelming.

On 7 Nov 14, the applicant’s commander recommended the applicant be discharged with an under honorable conditions (general) service characterization.  

On 12 Nov 14, the discharge action was reviewed and found to be legally sufficient.

On 19 Nov 14, the applicant was furnished an under honorable conditions (general) discharge, provided a 2B reentry code with a misconduct (minor infractions) narrative reason for separation, and was credited with one year, five months, and two days of active service.  

On 14 Apr 16, the Air Force Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge characterization, change the reason and authority for discharge, and change his RE 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/DP3ST recommends denial indicating the applicant has failed to provide any evidence of an error or an injustice.  The RE code of 2B is only compatible with a general or worse character of service.  AFPC/DP3ST calls into question the applicant provided statement from the Inquiries and Investigation Specialist.  

A complete copy of the AFPC/DP3ST evaluation is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant in rebuttal requests the Board consider changing his RE code so he can join the Air Force Reserve and states his last unit environment was filled with hostility, favoritism, corruption, fraud, waste and abuse, and leadership abusing their authority.  These allegations were substantiated during the course of an investigation which ultimately resulted in the deputy command resigning and seven officers/SNCOs receiving disciplinary actions.  Although he takes full responsibility for his actions, the fact he was being led by individuals who were “out of control” did not help him positively grow as an Air Force Airman.  He asks he be given an opportunity to serve in his local Air Force Reserve unit and prove how dedicated he is.  

A complete copy of the applicant’s rebuttal, with attachments, is at Exhibit E.  

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.  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-2015-04705 in Executive Session on 9 Feb 17 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-04705 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 2 Nov 15, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DP3ST, dated 9 May 16.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 8 Jun 16.
	Exhibit E.  Applicant’s Rebuttal, dated 20 Jun 16.

Pursuant to paragraph 1 of AFI 36-2603 (Title 32 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 865.1), it is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled matter.