RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2009-01015
            INDEX CODE:
      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Reentry (RE) code of 2C (Involuntarily Separated with an Honorable
Discharge) be upgraded to 1C (does not exist) or 3C (First-term airman
not yet considered under the Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP))  to
qualify him for reentry into the Air Force as an officer.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His RE code does not reflect the  type  of  service  he  provided  his
country.  He believes this negative mark undermines  the  decision  of
the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) to have the character  of
his discharge upgraded from General to Honorable.  His service to  the
Air Force has been deemed Honorable by the DRB and should be honorable
without any reservation.

He has long-term goals to rejoin the Air  Force/XXXXXXX  Air  National
Guard (XX ANG) to become an officer and eventually a pilot.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides an expanded statement
and copies of  his  college  transcripts,  extracts  of  his  military
personnel records, including his DD Form 214, Certificate  of  Release
or Discharge from Active Duty, letters of reference/appreciation,  and
an undated application for employment which includes a  cover  letter,
resume and references.

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant’s military personnel records indicate  he  enlisted  in  the
Regular Air Force on 20 Apr 04 as an airman first class  (E-3)  for  a
period of four years.

On 23 May 05, the applicant was  notified  by  his  commander  of  his
intent to recommend his involuntary discharge from the Air Force for a
Pattern of Misconduct  and  Conduct  Prejudicial  to  Good  Order  and
Discipline  under  the  provisions  of  AFI  36-3208,   Administrative
Separation of Airmen.

The reasons for the action were:

     a.  He did, on or about 5 Apr 05, fail to refrain from talking on
his personal cellular phone while posted as a sentinel  for  which  he
received  a  demotion  to  the  grade  of  airman  basic   (E-1)   via
nonjudicial punishment  and  an  Unfavorable  Information  File  (UIF)
entry.

     b.  He did, on or about 5 Apr 05, loiter at his post,  for  which
he received the aforementioned nonjudicial punishment and UIF entry.

     c.  He did, on or about 4 Apr 05,  fail  to  attend  a  mandatory
fitness appointment; for which he received a letter of reprimand,  UIF
entry and placement on the Control Roster.

     d.  He was, on or about 4 Apr 05, late for  duty,  for  which  he
received a letter of reprimand and establishment of a UIF.

     e.  He was, on or about 18 Mar 05, late for duty for  the  fourth
time in a two  month  period,  for  which  he  received  a  Letter  of
Reprimand.

     f.  He was, on or about 5 Mar 05, late for  duty  for  the  third
time in a  two-month  period,  for  which  he  received  a  letter  of
counseling.

On 26 May 05, after  consulting  with  legal  counsel,  the  applicant
acknowledged receipt of the letter  of  notification  and  elected  to
submit statements in his own behalf.

On 16 Jun 05, the case was found to  be  legally  sufficient  and  the
discharge authority approved the commander’s request  for  involuntary
discharge.

On 24 Jun 05, the applicant was furnished a General  (Under  Honorable
Conditions) discharge for Misconduct under the provisions of  AFI  36-
3208 and assigned an RE code of 2C.  He was credited  with  one  year,
two months, and five days of active service.

On 6 Apr 06, the AFDRB considered the applicant’s 1 Nov 05 request  to
upgrade his discharge to honorable, and to  change  his  RE  code  and
reason and authority for  his  discharge.   The  DRB  granted  partial
relief, upgrading his discharge to honorable, while leaving the reason
for discharge and RE code unchanged.

________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial, indicating the applicant did not provide
any documentation or justification to support his request.  RE code 2C
is the only authorized code for members involuntarily  separated  with
an honorable discharge.  Applicant requests his RE code be changed  to
1C or 3C.  There is no 1C RE code and members cannot be separated with
a RE code of 3C.

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

AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial, indicating the discharge was  consistent
with the procedural and  substantive  requirements  of  the  discharge
instruction and was within the discretion of the discharge  authority.
The RE code accurately reflects the applicant’s involuntary  discharge
and service characterization as determined by the AFDRB.   They  found
no error or injustice  in  the  applicant’s  discharge,  nor  did  the
applicant submit any evidence of or identify any error or injustice in
the discharge processing.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit D.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reiterates the contentions made in  his  original  case.
He reemphasizes his desire to get his RE code changed so he may pursue
a commission with the XX ANG  and  indicates  the  AFDRB  decision  to
upgrade his discharge without changing his RE code neglects  the  true
purpose for his original request, to serve once again.   Additionally,
he purposely decided not to  include  his  entire  case  file  in  his
original submission, assuming the  board  would  have  access  to  his
records.  Given the Air Force OPR opinions he did not  provide  enough
proof  to  substantiate  his  request,  he  concludes  there  must  be
information missing from his case file which prevents the  Board  from
making a complete and sound judgment.  As such, he provides a copy  of
his entire case file.

A complete copy of the applicant’s response, with attachments,  is  at
Exhibit F.

________________________________________________________________

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  warranting  a  change  to  the
applicant’s RE code.  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  offices  of  primary
responsibility  and  adopt  their  rationale  as  the  basis  for  our
conclusion the applicant has not  been  the  victim  of  an  error  or
injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence the RE code  of  2C,
issued in conjunction with his honorable  discharge,  was  erroneously
assigned  or  inaccurately  reflected   the   circumstances   of   his
separation, we find no compelling  basis  to  recommend  granting  the
relief sought in this application.

________________________________________________________________

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-
2009-01015 in Executive Session on 10 Nov 09, under the provisions  of
AFI 36-2603:

            XXXXXXXXXXX, Vice Chair
            XXXXXXXXXXX, Member
            XXXXXXXXXXX, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 24 Feb 09, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 27 Apr 09.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 11 Sep 09.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 Sep 09.
     Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated 20 Oct 09, w/atchs.




                                   XXXXXXXXXX
                                   Vice Chair