Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01998
Original file (BC 2014 01998.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 		DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01998

				COUNSEL:  NONE

				HEARING DESIRED:  NO 


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The following items on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release 
or Discharge from Active Duty, be corrected:

	a.  Item 26 – Separation Code:  JKN.

      b.  Item 27 – Reentry Code:  2B.
      
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His record does not reflect enough derogatory information to 
warrant the type of codes currently reflected on his DD Form 
214.

In support of his request, the applicant has provided a copy of 
his DD Form 214, a copy of AETC Form 125A, Record of 
Administrative Training Action, dated 17 Oct 13, a copy of a 
Letter of Reprimand, dated 26 Sep 13, a copy of AF Form 3070A, 
Record of Nonjudicial Punishment (AB thru TSgt), dated 21 Aug 
13, a copy of his Administrative Discharge Package, a copy of 
his Combat Control Selection Course - Certificate of Training, 
dated 5 Dec 12, and a copy of his Airman Leadership Class - 
Certificate of Training, dated 14 Jan 13.

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 29 Aug 
12.

On 26 Sep 13, the applicant received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) 
for failing to obey Air Education and Training Command 
Instruction 36-2216, Administration of Military Standards and 
Discipline Training, by using tobacco products in uniform.  He 
violated this policy when he was found smoking in uniform in the 
student parking lot.  The applicant waived his right to respond. 

On 27 Aug 13, the applicant accepted an Article 15, Nonjudicial 
Punishment, for wrongfully possessing and consuming alcohol in 
the student dormitory, wrongfully entered the room of a member 
of the opposite sex, and consuming alcohol while under the age 
of 21 in violations of Article 134, Uniform Code of Military 
Justice and Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code, Section 106.04.  The 
applicant was reduced in grade to airman, restricted to the 
limits of Joint Base San Antonio-Lackland for 15 days, and 
Reprimanded. 

On 23 Oct 13, the applicant was notified by his commander that 
she intended to recommend him for discharge for Minor 
Disciplinary Infractions in accordance with AFI 36-3208, 
Administrative Separation of Airmen, Chapter 5, paragraph 5.49.  
She also recommended the applicant’s service be characterized as 
General (Under Honorable Conditions).

On 25 Oct 13, the applicant consulted legal counsel and waived 
his right to submit statement on his behalf.  The Staff Judge 
advocate reviewed the case file and found no errors or 
irregularities prejudicial to the applicant’s substantive or 
procedural rights.  They recommended approval.

On 29 Oct 13, the discharge authority reviewed the case file and 
approved a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge 
without probation and rehabilitation.

On 30 Oct 13, the applicant was furnished a General (Under 
Honorable Conditions) discharge, and was credited with 1 year, 2 
months, and 2 days of active service.   

The applicant’s DD Form 214 reflects a Separation Code of “JKN” 
and a Reentry Code of “2B”

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force offices of 
primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibits C 
and D.    

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of 
an error or an injustice.  Based on a review of the master 
personnel records, the discharge, to include the Separation 
Code, Narrative Reason for Separation and Character of Service, 
was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements 
for the discharge instruction and within the discretion of the 
discharge authority.  

The applicant’s commander afforded him every opportunity to 
overcome his deficiencies and concluded he failed to correct his 
behavior and refused to comply with Air Force standards.  Based 
on this assessment, discharge was warranted.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of 
an error or an injustice.  The applicant was involuntarily 
discharged for Misconduct and based on the applicant’s Character 
of Service his record required a Reentry Code of 2B.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the 
applicant on 6 Feb 15 for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit E).  As of this date, no response has been received by 
this office.

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 injustice.  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 (OPR) and adopt their rationale as the basis for 
our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error 
of injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the 
contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested 
relief.

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the 
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2014-01998 in Executive Session on 25 Jun 15 under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2014-01998 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 1 May 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 23 Sep 14.
	Exhibit D.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 14 Oct 14.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Feb 15.

						





Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03500

    Original file (BC 2014 03500.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D. AFPC/DPSID recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice concerning the applicant’s request for BMT Honor Graduate status or the SAEMR. A thorough review of the applicant’s official military personnel record revealed no documentation which establishes the applicant was awarded either the Basic Military Training Honor Graduate Ribbon or the SAEMR. Since the applicant received his DD Form 214, the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02335

    Original file (BC 2014 02335.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 6 Apr 12, the Discharge Review Board (DRB) denied the applicant’s 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 applicant’s 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 | CY2014 | BC 2014 02657

    Original file (BC 2014 02657.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 applicant’s 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 | CY2014 | BC 2014 03998

    Original file (BC 2014 03998.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03998 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reentry (RE) Code “2B” which denotes “Separated with a General or Under Other than Honorable Conditions [UOTHC] Discharge” be changed to RE code “3A” which denotes “1st term airman separating before 36 months” to allow reenlistment in the Armed Forces. On 15 Aug 14, the applicant was discharged with...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02298

    Original file (BC 2014 02298.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On or about 18 Oct 11, he was derelict in the performance of his duties in that he willfully failed to refrain from sleeping during a meeting, as it was his duty to do, as evidenced by a Record of Proceedings of Vacation of Suspended Nonjudicial Punishment, dated 30 Nov 11. c. On or about 30 Aug 11, he was derelict in the performance of his duties in that he willfully returned late from lunch and refused to perform tasks assigned to him, as it was his duty to do, as evidenced by a Record of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04482

    Original file (BC-2012-04482.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Block 17 be changed to indicate he was not provided all appropriate dental services prior to separation. On 8 Nov 12, AFPC/DPSIT directed the applicant’s DD Form 214, Block 14, Military Education, be changed to reflect “(IVK) Underwater Egress Training, Nov 2008.” On 23 Jun 13, SAF/MRBR directed the applicant’s DD Form 214, Block 20, Member Requests Copy 6 be Sent to California Director of Veterans Affairs, be changed to reflect “No.” The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00582

    Original file (BC 2014 00582.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    (Will be administratively corrected) APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He received an honorable discharge and requests that he be provided more favorable separation and RE codes. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOA states the applicant’s RE code “2C” is erroneous and will administratively correct his record to reflect RE code “3A” which denotes “First-term Airman [involuntarily separated] {entry level} for inability to satisfactorily progress in a required training program without characterization of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04905

    Original file (BC-2012-04905 .txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    DPSOR recommends that his narrative reason for separation be changed from “Convenience of the Government” to “Unsatisfactory Performance.” The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial of the applicant’s request to change his RE code to a “1.” DPSOA states that on 28 Aug 2012, his commander approved his involuntary discharge with an honorable character of service for failure to progress in military training required to be qualified for service with the Air Force...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-02173

    Original file (BC-2008-02173.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS The applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors that occurred in the discharge processing, and provided no facts warranting an upgrade to his discharge characterization. The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2008-02173 in Executive Session on 27 January 2009, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04598

    Original file (BC-2012-04598.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 25 Jan 2011, he was discharged from the Air Force, with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions). ________________________________________________________________ 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...