RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01616 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: YES 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

1. His reentry (RE) code of 3K (Reserved for use by AFPC or the 
AFBCMR when no other reenlistment eligibility code applies or is 
appropriate) and separation code of “JFF” (Secretarial 
Authority) be changed to codes that will allow him to reenlist. 

 

2. His pay grade of E4 (senior airman) be reinstated. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

In May 2009, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) 
changed his character of service and RE code. 

 

In support of the request, the applicant provides copies of his 
original DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from 
Active Duty, reissued DD Form 214, character letters, and an un-
notarized affidavit. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 2 Jan 02, the applicant entered the Regular Air Force and was 
progressively promoted to the rank of E4 with an effective date 
and date of rank of 1 Jul 04. 

 

On 6 Mar 06, the applicant received a Letter of Reprimand for 
failure to go. 

 

On 27 Mar 06, the applicant received an Article 15, Uniform Code 
of Military Justice nonjudicial punishment, for failure to go at 
his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time. His 
punishment consisted of a suspended reduction to the grade of E3 
(airman first class) until 29 Sep 06 and a forfeiture of $100. 

 

On 19 Oct 06, the applicant’s received an Article 15 in which 
his suspended reduction was vacated. On 22 Sep 06, the 
applicant failed to go to his appointed place of duty at the 


prescribed time. His punishment consisted of a reduction in 
grade to airman first class with a new date of rank of 30 Mar 
06, with an effective date of 19 Oct 06. 

 

On 7 Dec 06, the applicant was notified of pending discharge 
action. Specifically, the commander cited a pattern of 
misconduct – conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline as 
the basis for discharge. The commander listed the applicant’s 
failures to go as the reason for discharge. 

 

On 12 Dec 06, the applicant submitted written statements in his 
own behalf and requested an honorable discharge. 

 

On 20 Dec 06, the discharge authority directed discharge without 
probation and rehabilitation and the applicant was discharged 
with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge with the 
narrative reason for separation of “misconduct” and a separation 
code of “JKM” with the RE code of 2B (separated with a general 
or under other than honorable conditions discharge). 

 

On 20 May 99, the applicant appeared before the AFDRB requesting 
an upgrade of his discharge and a change of his RE code. The 
AFDBR determined the applicant’s discharge was inequitable and 
directed that his discharge be upgraded to “Honorable” and his 
RE code be changed to “3K” based on the following findings: 1) 
the applicant was suffering from sleep deprivation and receiving 
inadequate therapy for his sleeping problem, and 2) the 
applicant’s immediate leadership violated Air Force safety 
standards in regards to ensuring the applicant was afforded 
adequate rest periods. 

 

The applicant was issued a new DD Form 214 reflecting his 
character of service as “Honorable,” his separation code as 
“JFF,” his RE code as “3K,” and his narrative reason for 
separation as “Secretarial Authority.” 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

HQ AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial of the applicant’s request for 
reinstatement of the rank of senior airman. DPSOE states the 
commander at the time was acting within his authority when 
imposing punishment. 

 

The complete HQ AFPC/DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the 
applicant on 14 Jan 11 for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit D). As of this date, this office has not received a 
response. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 error or injustice. Based on 
previous changes made to his record by the Air Force Discharge 
Review Board (AFDRB), the applicant requests further relief from 
this Board, which he opines will complete the process of 
correcting his record. The applicant believes additional relief 
is warranted through further upgrade of his reenlistment code 
and narrative reason as well as restoration of his pay grade of 
senior airman. Regarding the RE code and narrative reason, we 
note that the relief provided him through AFDRB channels is the 
same as that likely to have been granted by this Board had a 
determination been made he was the victim of error or injustice. 
Based on a review of his record and the evidence provided, we do 
not find that a basis exists to provide him with a further 
change in his RE code or narrative reason. We note that the RE 
code and separation code he now has can be waived by any 
military service that wants to enlist him. Regarding his pay 
grade, we note he was reduced in grade as a result of Article 15 
action. Notwithstanding the findings of the AFDRB, he has not 
provided evidence to show that the punishment the commander 
imposed under Article 15 was arbitrary and capricious or 
exceeded the commander’s discretionary authority. As such, 
without a basis to question the Article 15 action, we do not 
find a basis to restore his previous grade. Therefore, in the 
absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to 
recommend granting the relief sought in this application. 

 

4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not 
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel 
will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved. 
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably 
considered. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 


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-2010-01616 in Executive Session on 15 February 2011, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 27 Apr 10, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSOE, dated 30 Nov 10. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Jan 11. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair