RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2017-00217

	COUNSEL: NONE

	HEARING: NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  His reentry code changed.

2.  His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was led to believe that he was voluntarily leaving the military to avoid an involuntary discharge.  He was very young and had nobody to guide him in the right direction.  He is now a fully bonded law enforcement officer and would like to be able to reenter the military to provide a better future for his family.  The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 15 October 2002.

On 22 April 2005, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intent to recommend that he be discharged under the provisions of AFPD 36-32, Military Retirements and Separations; and AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, for misconduct and minor disciplinary infractions, as evidenced by four letters of counseling, seven letters of reprimand and one Article 15.

On 26 April 2005, the applicant indicated that he consulted with counsel and waived his right to submit statements. 

On 28 April 2005, the staff judge advocate found the discharge action legally sufficient and recommended the applicant be separated with a general discharge, without probation and rehabilitation.  On 3 May 2005, the discharge authority approved the recommendation.

On 11 May 2005, the applicant received a general (under honorable conditions) discharge, and was credited with 2 years and 7 months of active service.  His reentry code is 2P (Absent without leave (AWOL); deserter or dropped from rolls (DFR).

On 17 November 2008, the applicant submitted an application to the Air Force Discharge Review Board requesting his discharge be upgraded to honorable.

On 1 December 2009, the Air Force Discharge Review Board denied upgrading the applicant’s discharge, or changing his reentry code and narrative reason for separation.  The Air Force Discharge Review Board concluded that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority.

For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B and the advisories at Exhibits C and D.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DP3ST recommends denying the applicant’s request for a reentry code that will allow him to reenlist.  The applicant was discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) character of service.  Therefore, in accordance with AFI 36-2606, Reenlistment in the United States Air Force, the applicant’s correct reentry code is 2B (Separated with a general or under-other-than-honorable-conditions discharge).  However, an erroneous reentry code [2P] was inadvertently entered on the applicant’s DD Form 214.  Unless otherwise directed by the board, the applicant’s DD Form 214 will be corrected to reflect his reentry code as 2B.  The complete advisory is at Exhibit C.

SAF/MRBP recommends denying the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge. The applicant previously sought remedy through the Air Force Discharge Review Board before applying to the Board. On 1 December 2009, the applicant’s case was considered (through a records only review board) and the Air Force Discharge Review Board voted unanimously to deny his request to upgrade his service characterization, change the discharge narrative reason, and change his reenlistment eligibility code. The Air Force Discharge Review Board found no evidence of inequity or impropriety during his discharge process and therefore did not grant any relief.  It does not appear the applicant has provided any additional evidence to prove there was any inequity or impropriety during his discharge process.  The complete advisory is at Exhibit D.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Board sent copies of the Air Force evaluations to the applicant on 30 November 2017 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/DP3ST and SAF/MRBP, which finds that a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions.  Therefore, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s records.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The applicant be informed the evidence did not demonstrate material error or injustice, 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-2017-00217 in Executive Session on 17 May 2018:

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

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 26 January 2017.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Advisory opinion, AFPC/DP3ST, dated 26 September 2017.
Exhibit D:	Advisory Opinion, SAF/MRBP, dated 6 November 2017.
Exhibit E:	Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 30 November 2017.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.