Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03604
Original file (BC-2011-03604.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03604 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

1. His reentry (RE) code be changed to allow him to rejoin the 
military. 

 

2. His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded 
to honorable. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He made a really stupid decision to drink and drive and now 
cannot rejoin the military. The military presence has been very 
strong in his family and he would like to make the military a 
career. He submits letters of recommendation and character 
references in hopes of having his RE code changed. He believes 
everyone deserves a second chance. He spoke with a recruiter who 
told him that if he could get his RE code changed from “2B” (Separated with a general or under-other-than-honorable-
conditions (UOTHC) discharge) to “1” (Applicants Eligible for 
Immediate Reenlistment), then he would be allowed to join the 
Coast Guard. If he is allowed to rejoin the military, he 
promises to work hard and make a difference while serving. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides a personal 
letter, a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or 
Discharge from Active Duty, a copy of his AF IMT 100, Request 
and Authorization for Separation, copies of letters of support, 
and a copy of his AF Form 910, (Enlisted Performance Report (AB 
thru TSgt). 

 

His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 13 Jan 09. 
His commander recommended him for discharge under the provisions 
of AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-3208, Section 5H, paragraph 5.49 for 
failing to refrain from consuming alcoholic beverages while under 


the legal drinking age of 21 on two occasions. He received an 
Article 15 and a Letter of Reprimand for these actions. The 
applicant acknowledged receipt of the discharge notification on 
6 Jul 11. After a legal review of the case file, the staff judge 
advocate found the case legally sufficient. The applicant was 
discharged with a general (UHC) discharge on 23 Jun 11 after 
serving 2 years, 5 months, and 11 days on active duty. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial. The applicant does not provide any 
proof of an error or injustice with regard to his 2C [sic] RE 
code. Per the governing instructions, the applicant’s “2B” RE 
code is required based on his involuntary discharge. 

 

The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

His request should be evaluated based on how he feels about 
serving in the military and how he performed while serving over 
2 years in the Air Force. He rated above average, never missed a 
day of work, deployed for 6 months, and received letters of 
recommendation and character letters from his peers. He was 
involved in his community by playing on the base softball team 
and volunteering at local sporting events. He provides 
documentation to show that the DUI was dismissed and would like 
the findings to be considered in his request. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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. Evidence has 
not been presented in support of his appeal which would lead us 
to believe that a change to his RE code is warranted. We took 
notice of his complete submission in judging the merits of this 
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. Additionally, with 
regard to the applicant’s request to have his discharge upgraded, 
we found no indication the actions taken to effect his discharge 
were improper or contrary to the provisions of the governing 
regulations in effect at the time, or the actions taken against 
the applicant were based on factors other than his own 
misconduct. While we note the documentation provided by the 
applicant reflects the DUI charge was dismissed, we note he was 
discharged for minor disciplinary infractions, which was based on 
several instances of misconduct. Therefore, in the absence of 
evidence to the contrary, we find no 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-2011-03604 in Executive Session on 14 Feb 12, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 31 Aug 11, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 19 Oct 11. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Nov 11. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, undated. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03053

    Original file (BC-2011-03053.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluation were forwarded to the applicant on 23 Dec 11 for review and comment within 30 days. 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-02728

    Original file (BC-2012-02728.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force, which are at Exhibit C and D. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial and states that the applicant’s discharge to include his character of service was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge instructions and was within the discharge...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02927

    Original file (BC 2013 02927.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 1 Apr 11, the applicant’s commander notified her that he was recommending her discharge from the Air Force for Misconduct: Commission of a Serious Offense, Other Serious Offenses for the offenses resulting from her Summary court-martial conviction. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D. AFLOA/JAJM recommends approval of the applicant’s request for her general (under honorable conditions) discharge to be upgraded to honorable, given her apparent disparate treatment....

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05522

    Original file (BC 2012 05522.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant received the appropriate RE code based his being involuntarily discharged with service characterized as general. A complete copy of the AFPC/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 21 Dec 12, for review and comment within 30 days. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01202

    Original file (BC-2012-01202.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He received an erroneous RE code of 4H; his correct RE code is 2B. Unless otherwise directed by the Board, AFPC/DPSOY will publish and provide the applicant with a corrected copy of his DD Form 214. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-01202 in Executive Session on 21 August 2012 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00881

    Original file (BC-2010-00881.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    They found no evidence of an error or injustice in the processing of the applicant's discharge action. The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D. AFPC/DPSIPV recommends denial of the applicant’s request for reinstatement and service credit, noting the applicant was involuntarily discharged with 1 year, 5 months, and 11 days of active service, after being diagnosed with an Adjustment Disorder. The complete AF/A1DLV evaluation is at Exhibit F. AFPC/DPSIT recommends denial of the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-01497

    Original file (BC-2008-01497.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 2 Oct 89, the applicant’s commander notified him he was recommending his discharge from the Air Force for misconduct. He was discharged on 11 Oct 89. 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 decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of proof of the existence of either...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02386

    Original file (BC-2010-02386.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02386 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reentry (RE) code of 2C (involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service) be changed be to a code that will allow him reentry into military service. Prior to 2003, the Services...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01018

    Original file (BC-2013-01018.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01018 COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO __________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. On 24 Nov 2008, she was discharged from the Air Force, with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions). DPSOR states that RE code 2B is required per AFI 36- 2606, Reenlistments in the USAF, based on her...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 04510

    Original file (BC 2012 04510.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04510 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ______________________________________________________________ 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 allow his reentry into the military. On 25 July 2012, the applicant was...