Reenlistment 

Program 

Consideration 

DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-00227 
  
COUNSEL:  NONE 
HEARING DESIRED: NO 

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 
 
IN THE MATTER OF: 
   
 
    
 
   
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 
 
His  Re-entry  (RE)  code  of  “2C,”  Approved  Honorable  Involuntary 
Separation or Entry Level Separation, be changed to:  
 
  a.  “3B” 
“Selective 
Decision is Pending, or  
 
  b.  “1M”  “Eligible  Second  Term/Career  Airman  Not  Yet 
Considered Under Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP), or 
   c.  “1P” Second Term or Career Airman Selected Under SRP, or  
 
  d.  “1Q”  Career  Airman  Selected  Under  SRP  With  Over  20  Years 
Total Active Federal Military Service (TAFMS).   
0272 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
 
Over the 4th of July weekend in 2011 he received a citation for 
“minor in consumption of alcohol.”  He had enlisted in the Air 
Force Reserve and was scheduled to begin Basic Military Training 
(BMT)  on  26 July  2011.    He  notified  his  recruiter  and  the 
recruiter  told  him  to  ensure  the  citation  was  “taken  care  of” 
before  he  departed  for  BMT.    He  appeared  in  court  on 
15 July 2011,  pled  guilty,  was  fined  $182.00  and  ordered  to 
attend alcohol awareness education.  The judge was aware he was 
enlisting  in  the  Air  Force  and  told  him  he  could  send 
documentation of military alcohol awareness training when it was 
completed.  He arranged a payment schedule for the fine. 
 
He  was  in  his  5th  week  of  BMT  when  he  was  notified  that  a 
background  check  uncovered  the  alcohol  incident,  his  Air  Force 
Reserve unit did not want him any longer and he was being moved 
to a transition flight and processed for discharge.  He notified 
his  father  who  paid  the  court  fine  and  asked  the  judge  to 
dismiss the requirement for the alcohol awareness education.   
 
He  sincerely  believed  he  had  complied  with  his  recruiter’s 
instruction  to  take  care  of  the  citation.    He  did  not  realize 

and 

Air 

Force 

Instruction 

(AFI) 

that not having the case completely adjudicated would affect his 
Air Force enlistment.  He wants very much to serve his country 
in the military.  He respectfully requests to have his discharge 
characterized  in  a  way  that  remains  honorable  but  has  a 
reenlistment  code  that  would  allow  him  to  enlist  in  the  Air 
Force or another service.   
 
In  support  of  his  request,  the  applicant  provides  a  personal 
statement, a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or 
Discharge from Active Duty, and related court documents.   
 
The  applicant’s  complete  submission,  with  attachments,  is  at 
Exhibit A.  
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
STATEMENT OF FACTS: 
 
The  applicant  enlisted  in  the  Regular  Air  Force  on  1  August 
2011.  On 6 September 2011, his commander notified him that he 
was  recommending  him  for  discharge  under  the  provisions  of  Air 
Force  Policy  Directive  (AFPD)  36-32,  Military  Retirements  and 
Separations 
36-3208 
Administrative  Separation  of  Airmen,  Chapter  5,  Section  C, 
Defective  Enlistments  paragraph  5.14,  under  Basis  of  Discharge 
for  Erroneous  Enlistment.    Specifically,  the  applicant  had  an 
open law violation and did not meet the requirements to enlist.   
 
The  applicant  acknowledged  his  commander’s  intent  to  discharge 
him  as  well  as  his  right  to  consult  counsel  and  submit 
statements  on  his  behalf.    He  waived  his  right  to  consult 
counsel and submit statements on his behalf.  Subsequent to the 
file  being  found  legally  sufficient  the  discharge  authority 
approved  the  recommendation  and  directed  that  the  applicant  be 
discharged.    On  8  September  2011  the  applicant  was  separated 
with 
was 
“uncharacterized”  and  his  narrative  reason  for  separation  was 
listed as “Erroneous Entry (Other).   
 
______________________________________________________________ 
 
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
AFRC/A1K recommends denial.  A1K states the applicant’s RE Code 
of  2C  is  accurate  based  on  his  receipt  of  an  entry  level 
separation  while  attending  Basic  Military  Training.    Reentry 
Code 2C does not prevent reentry in the Air Force or Air Force 
Reserve.    Given  such,  and  since  the  applicant  did  not  provide 
any documentation to substantiate an error was made, there is no 
basis for correction.   
 
The complete AFRC/A1K evaluation is at Exhibit C.  
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

separation. 

service 

level 

entry 

His 

an 

 

 
2 

 
A  copy  of  the  Air  Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the 
applicant on 27 March 2012 for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit D).  To 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 an error or an injustice that would 
warrant  relief.    We  took  notice  of  the  applicant’s  complete 
submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree 
with the opinion and recommendations of the Air Force office of 
primary  responsibility  that  the  RE  code  which  was  assigned  at 
the time of his separation accurately reflects the circumstances 
of his separation.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the 
contrary, 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  this  application 
BC-2012-00227  in  Executive  Session  on  31  July  2012,  under  the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The following documentary evidence was considered: 
 

  Panel Chair 
  Member 
  Member 

 
3 

 
 

 

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149 dated 17 January 2012, w/atchs. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. 
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFRC/A1K, dated 12 March 2012. 
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 March 2012.  
 
 
 
 
                                    
                                   Panel Chair 
 

 

 
4