RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02996 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: YES 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His reentry (RE) code of 2C, which denotes “Involuntarily 
separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation 
without characterization of service”, be changed to 1A, which 
denotes “ineligible to reenlist, but condition waived.” 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

1. He was given a general (under honorable conditions) 
discharge; however he appealed to the Air Force Discharge Review 
Board (AFDRB) to upgrade his character of service to honorable, 
to change his narrative reason for separation and reentry (RE) 
code. 

 

2. The AFDRB upgraded his character of service and changed his 
narrative reason for separation; however, they denied the 
request to change his RE code. Since his discharge was 
upgraded, he should be eligible to reenlist in any branch of the 
armed services. 

 

3. He has obtained a Bachelor’s degree, so he can be a better 
asset to the branch he chooses. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of his 
DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active 
Duty and a memorandum. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 12 Oct 04, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force. 

 

On 18 Jun 05, the applicant was notified of his commander’s 
intent to recommend that he be discharged from the Air Force 
under the provisions of AFPD 36-32, Air Force Military Training 
and AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, paragraph 
5.52.3, Other Serious Offenses. The applicant acknowledged 
receipt of the notification of discharge, waived his option to 


consult counsel and his right to submit a statement on his own 
behalf. 

 

The specific reason for this action was: Between on or about 
4 Mar 05 and on or about 28 Mar 05, the applicant reconstructed 
the National Registry of Emergency Medical Technicians test from 
his memory or the memory of others. For this misconduct, he 
received non-judicial (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of 
Military Justice (UCMJ); forfeiture of $728 pay per month for 
two months; seven days extra duty suspended until 6 Dec 05, 
after which time it would have been remitted without further 
action unless sooner vacated; and a reprimand. 

 

On 19 Jul 05, the case file was reviewed and determined to be 
legally sufficient to support separation. The Deputy Staff 
Judge Advocate recommended to the 882 Training Group Commander 
the applicant be discharged and issued a general (under 
honorable conditions) discharge without probation and 
rehabilitation. On 20 Jul 05, the discharge authority approved 
the applicant’s discharge. On 21 Jul 05, the applicant was 
discharged from the Air Force with a general (under honorable 
conditions) discharge in the grade of airman first class. He 
served 9 months and 10 days of total active service. 

 

On 19 Feb 07, the applicant filed an appeal to the AFDRB to 
upgrade his character of service to honorable, to change the 
narrative reason for separation and reentry code. 

 

On 13 Dec 07, the applicant appeared and testified before the 
AFDRB with counsel. The Board concluded that while the 
discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive 
requirements of the discharge regulation, the discharge action 
was too harsh in light of the surrounding circumstances. In 
view of the foregoing findings, the Board concluded the 
characterization of the applicant’s discharge was more 
accurately described as honorable. The applicant’s 
characterization was changed to honorable and the reason for 
discharge waschanged to Secretarial Authority. However, the 
Board concluded the applicant’s RE code should remain unchanged. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

HQ AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial. Although the AFDRB denied the 
applicant a reenlistment eligible RE code, his RE code was 
changed to 2C, “Involuntarily separated with an honorable 
discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of 
service” based on his new character of service to honorable. 

 

The applicant’s RE code 2C is required per AFI 36-2606, Reenlistments in the United States Air Force, chapter 3, based 
on his involuntary discharge with an honorable character of 
service. The applicant does not provide any evidence of an 


error or injustice, but states “If I was awarded an honorable 
discharge then why cannot I be eligible to reenlist in any 
branch but the Army?” The applicant seems to believe an 
honorable character of service means a member should be 
reenlistment eligible, which is not the case. 

 

The complete DPSOA 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 5 Oct 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 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. 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 office of primary responsibility and adopt its 
rationale as the basis for our conclusion that 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 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 AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2011-02996 in Executive Session on 29 Mar 12, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 Panel Chair 

Member 

 Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 Aug 11, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOA, Letter, dated 5 Oct 11. 

 Exhibit D. SAF/MRBR, Letter, dated 29 Oct 11. 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair