RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2017-01987

	COUNSEL: NONE

	HEARING: NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1. His reentry code be changed to 2C (Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry-level separation without characterization of service).

	AMENDED REQUEST:  His reentry code be changed to one that will allow him to reenlist in the Air Force.

2.  He be promoted to the grade of senior airman (E-4).

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) upgraded his discharge; however, his reentry code was not changed to coincide with the honorable character of service.  In addition, he met the time in grade requirement to be promoted to the grade of E-4, but he was never promoted because of the circumstances surrounding his previous discharge characterization.

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is a former airman first class (E-3) who served in the Regular Air Force.

On 14 March 2013, the applicant was discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) character of service.  His separation code and corresponding narrative reason for separation was JDT (Fraudulent Entry [Drug Abuse]) and he was not credited with active service due to the fraudulent entry.  His reentry code is 2B (Separated with a general or under-other-than-honorable-conditions discharge).

On 8 August 2013, the applicant appealed to the AFDRB to upgrade his discharge to honorable and change his reentry code so he can serve his country again.

On 4 April 2014, the AFDRB 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.  However, they determined that the overall quality of the applicant’s service was more accurately reflected by an honorable service characterization and a change to his narrative reason for separation.  The AFDRB denied changing his reentry code.

In June 2014, based on the correction to his record, the applicant’s DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, was void and he was issued new DD Forms 214, which reflected his character of service as honorable, his separation code and corresponding reason for separation as KFF (Secretarial Authority).  In addition, he was credited with 2 years, 6 months, and 21 days of active service.  The reentry code remained 2B.

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/DP2SSM recommends denying the applicant’s request for a more favorable [waiverable] reentry code.  Nevertheless, in accordance with AFI 36-2606, Reenlistment in the United States Air Force, the reentry code 2B should have been administratively changed to 2C when his discharge was upgraded to honorable.  Unless otherwise directed by the Board, the applicant’s reentry code will be changed to 2C to correspond with his honorable service characterization.  The complete advisory is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DP2SPP recommends granting that applicant’s request to be promoted to the grade of E-4.  According to AFI 36-2505, Airman Promotion/Demotion Programs, the applicant would have been eligible for promotion to the grade of E-4 on 24 December 2012, with the promotion authority’s written recommendation.  However, due to the investigation into the alleged drug abuse, his promotion was placed in a withhold status.  Once involuntary discharge action was initiated, the applicant became ineligible for promotion.  Following their review of the record and the AFDRB findings, they determined that had it not been for the false allegations [sic] brought against the applicant, he would likely have been recommended for promotion to the grade of E-4.  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 6 December 2017, for comment (Exhibit E), and the applicant replied on 26 December 2017.  In his response, the applicant requests that the Board consider a more favorable reentry code.  He contends that during his time in the Air Force he embodied Air Force core values.  Since his discharge, he has worked a full-time job, earned his bachelor’s degree, and maintained his fitness.  He would like another chance to show that he can be a leader and help make the Air Force better.  Changing his reentry code to a waiverable code will give him a chance to try.  The applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit F.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The application was timely filed.

2.  The applicant exhausted all available avenues of non-judicial relief before applying to the Board.

3.  After thoroughly reviewing all Exhibits, the Board concludes that the applicant is not the victim of an error or injustice.  The Board concurs with the rationale and recommendation of AFPC/DP2SSM and finds that a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions regarding the reentry code, beyond the administrative relief already noted.  Regarding the promotion to the grade of senior airman (E-4), the Board notes the comments of AFPC/DP2SPP, but disagrees.  AFPC/DP2SPP’s recommendation is based on their misinterpretation of the AFDRB findings.  They state the applicant would have been recommended for promotion had it not been for the false accusations brought against him.  It appears they are referring to his estranged spouse’s statement to security forces regarding a marijuana pipe she found in the applicant’s apartment and informed them that she believed he had stopped smoking marijuana since entering the Air Force.  His sister provided a statement indicating the pipe belonged to her.  However, the applicant was not punished for the drug paraphernalia found in his apartment and it was not the basis for his discharge.  The applicant was discharged for defective enlistment because an investigation revealed that he knowingly withheld information and misrepresented his past use of illegal drugs when he applied for admission to the Air Force.  This investigation is the reason the applicant’s promotion to E-4 was placed in a withhold status.  He became ineligible for promotion when the discharge action was initiated.  Following his discharge, the AFDRB determined the discharge was procedurally correct and that the applicant was provided full administrative due process.  Therefore, the investigation that caused his promotion to be placed in a withhold status was also procedurally correct.  The fact that the AFDRB also determined the overall quality of the applicant’s service was more accurately reflected by an honorable discharge does not negate their finding that the discharge was procedurally correct.  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-2017-01987 in Executive Session on 19 July 2018:

All members voted against correcting the record.  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atch, dated 9 April 2017.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Advisory opinion, AFPC/DP2SSM, dated 6 November 2017.
Exhibit D:	Advisory opinion, AFPC/DP2SPP, dated 30 November 2017.
Exhibit E:	Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 6 December 2017.
Exhibit F:	Applicant’s response, dated 26 December 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.