RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00339
INDEX CODE: 110.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His reentry (RE) code of 4H which denotes Serving suspended
punishment pursuant to Article 15, Uniform Code of Military
Justice (UMCJ) be changed to allow him to reenlist.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He performed exceptionally and received recognition from the wing
command post. He is not sure if the RE code was given due to a
reduction in force or if his Article 15 that had expired was
never removed from his records.
In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of his
AF Form 910, Enlisted Performance Report, and a personal letter.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 22 January
2002. He was progressively promoted to the grade of senior
airman, having assumed the grade effective and with a date of
rank of 22 January 2005.
On 5 April 2005, he received an Article 15 for being absent from
his place of duty without authority. His punishment consisted of
reduction to the grade of airman first class, suspended through 4
October 2005, and a letter of reprimand.
He was honorably discharged on 21 January 2006 and served four
years on active duty.
AFPC/DPSOA will administratively correct the applicants record
to 3K which denotes Reserved for use by HQ AFPC or the AFBCMR
when no other reenlistment eligibility code applies or is
appropriate unless otherwise directed by the Board.
On 2 August 2010, the applicant requested his application be
closed in order to provide additional information (Exhibit F).
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFLOA/JAJM recommends denial in regards to the Article 15. JAJM
states the applicant was not serving on a suspended punishment to
the Article 15 on his date of separation of 21 January 2006. His
suspended reduction was automatically remitted on 5 October 2005.
JAJM recommends the apparent agencies clarify the applicants RE
code.
The complete JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C.
AFPC/DPSOA states the applicants RE code will be
administratively changed to 3K. This RE code is the most
appropriate code at this time; however, he will still require a
waiver to reenter the military.
The complete AFPC/DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant states he closed his request in order to contact
the Director of Operations for a letter of reference. However,
he was unsuccessful. He agrees with the recommendation of
changing his RE code to 3K.
The applicants complete response is at Exhibit H.
_________________________________________________________________
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 to warrant
changing his RE code to allow him to reenlist. We note that
DPSOA will administratively correct the applicants records to
reflect he received a 3K RE code. We took notice of the
applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the
case; however, we agree with the opinions and recommendations 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 to the contrary, we find no basis to
recommend granting his request.
_________________________________________________________________
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 Docket Number BC-
2010-00339 in Executive Session on 8 December 2010, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Panel Chair
Member
Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 29 Feb 10, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 21 Apr 10.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 16 Jun 10.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Jul 10.
Exhibit F. Letter, Applicant, dated 2 Aug 10.
Exhibit G. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 30 Aug 10.
Exhibit H. Letter, Applicant, undated.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02586
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02586 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reentry code of 4H which denotes Serving suspended punishment pursuant to Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), be changed to allow him to reenlist. The applicant was honorably discharged on 9 May 2006 in the grade of airman first class under the provisions of AFI 36- 3208 (Completion of...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | bc 2013 02696
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial of the applicants request to change his characterization of service. AFPC/DPSOY will provide the applicant with a corrected copy of his DD Form 214 with a RE code of 2B, unless otherwise directed by the Board. Regarding his request to change his RE code, we note that DPSOA states his RE code was recorded in error and we agree with their recommendation to...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01982
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01982 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. On 30 July 2010, AFPC/DPSOE notified the applicant that a review of his record revealed that since he was serving under a suspended reduction in grade at the time of his separation, and, they found no documentation vacating the suspended...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02335
On 6 Apr 12, the Discharge Review Board (DRB) denied the applicants requests to upgrade his discharge, change his narrative reason for separation and RE code. A complete copy of the AFLOA/JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial as it pertains to the applicants request to change the SPD code, narrative reason for separation, and character of service. Therefore, as the applicant has presented no evidence to indicate that the commander abused his discretionary...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01181
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01181 COUNSEL: NO HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. The applicant does not provide any evidence in support of his appeal. The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00453
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00453 INDEX CODE: 126.04, 112.10 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Article 15 she received on 20 Dec 06 be removed and her Reentry (RE) code of 2X (First-term, second-term, or career airman considered but not selected for reenlistment under the Selective Reenlistment Program...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02657
According to the DD Form 214, on 2 Aug 13, the applicant was discharged for Misconduct (Minor Infractions) with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions) in the grade of airman first class. The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit B. AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial of the applicants requests to change his RE code to 1# indicating the applicant does not provide any proof of an error or injustice in reference to his RE code 2B, but states he was unjustly discharged. THE...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04852
According to copies of documents extracted from the Automated Records Management System (ARMS), by way of an AF Form 3070, Record of Nonjudicial Punishment Proceedings, the applicants commander offered him nonjudicial punishment (NJP) proceedings under Article 15 UCMJ, on 10 April 2006, for one specification of a violation of Article 134, Adultery. However, the Air Force does not recognize any time served after a member separates. The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05343
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05343 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Reentry (RE) code of 2X (First-term, second-term or career airman considered but not selected for reenlistment under the Selective Re-enlistment Program (SRP)) be changed to allow her to reenter the military. On 5 Jun 08, after receiving two...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04198
On 9 November 1993, the applicants BCD was ordered to be executed and the applicant was discharged with a BCD on 10 November 1993. The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 1 April 2011 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit F). We have considered the applicant's overall quality of service, the...