RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00836
INDEX CODE: 110.02
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 18 SEP 08
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His separation program designator (SPD) code of “GHJ” (Unsatisfactory
Performance) be changed.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He does not believe that his discharge for unsatisfactory performance
was justified.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provided documentation from
his military personnel records.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant’s available military personnel records indicate he enlisted
in the Regular Air Force on 29 Dec 94.
On 8 May 06, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was
recommending the applicant be discharged for unsatisfactory
performance based on his failure to progress in on-the-job training
(OJT). The reasons for this action were as follows:
a. On or about 8 Aug 04, he failed Career Development Course
(CDC) 2A373B. The minimum passing score was 65 percent; his score was
62 percent. This was documented in a memorandum to Major J--- K---
from Staff Sergeant (SSgt) J--- W---, Unit Training Manager, as well
as a Report of Course Examination, dated 30 Aug 04.
b. On or about 22 Nov 04, he failed CDC 2A373B for the second
time. The minimum passing score is 65 percent; his score was 59
percent. This was documented in a memorandum to Major J--- K--- from
Master Sergeant (MSgt) D--- K---, unit training manager, as well as a
Report of Course Examination, as of 22 Nov 04.
The applicant was advised of his rights in the matter and that an
honorable discharge would be recommended.
On 13 Jul 06, an administrative discharge board convened and found the
applicant did, on or about 8 Aug 04, fail his CDC 2A373B; and, on or
about 22 Nov 04, he did fail his CDC 2A373B for the second time. The
board recommended the applicant be separated with an honorable
discharge.
On 2 Aug 06, the discharge authority approved the discharge action and
directed the applicant be given a general discharge. (Examiner’s
Note: Although the discharge authority’s letter reads “general,”
based on the commander’s and administrative discharge board’s
recommendations, it appears the applicant was to receive an
“honorable” discharge as indicated below).
On 4 Aug 06, the applicant was honorably discharged under the
provisions of AFI (Unsatisfactory Performance) in the grade of staff
sergeant and assigned an SPD code of “GHJ.” He was credited with 11
years, 7 months, and 6 days of active service.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial indicating that based on the
documentation in the applicant’s records, the discharge was consistent
with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge
regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority.
The applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or
injustices that occurred in the discharge processing. He provided no
facts warranting a change to his SPD or RE code.
A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 1 Jun
07 for review and response within 30 days. As of this date, no
response has been received by this office (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. The applicant's complete
submission was thoroughly reviewed and his contentions were duly
noted. However, we do not find the applicant’s uncorroborated
assertions or the documentation presented in support of his appeal
sufficiently persuasive that corrective action is warranted. The
evidence of record indicates the applicant was involuntarily
discharged for unsatisfactory performance. No evidence has been
presented which would lead us to believe the discharge action was
improper or contrary to the provisions of the directive under which it
was effected. Further, it appears the SPD code was appropriately
assigned and accurately reflected the circumstances of his separation.
In view of the foregoing, and in the absence of evidence to the
contrary, we conclude that no basis exists to recommend favorable
action on the applicant’s request that his narrative reason for
separation and corresponding SPD code be changed.
_________________________________________________________________
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 in
Executive Session on 23 Aug 07, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Panel Chair
Mr. Wallace F. Beard, Jr., Member
Ms. Karen A. Holloman, Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number
BC-2007-00836 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 7 Mar 07, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 4 May 07.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 14 May 07.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 Jun 07.
KATHLEEN F. GRAHAM
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03906
Applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A. Applicant was honorably discharged on 6 Nov 03, in the grade of airman (E-2), under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, by reason of unsatisfactory performance. Applicant’s response to Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit E. ___________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01115
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01115 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE: 13 OCTOBER 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) Code, Narrative Reason and Separation Code be changed so he may join the Air National Guard. On 7 February 1997, the discharge authority directed that...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03070
The base legal office reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient to support discharge and recommended applicant be discharged with an honorable discharge without probation and rehabilitation. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS states, based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02417
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005- 02417 INDEX CODE: 100.00, 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 5 FEBRUARY 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His narrative reason for separation and reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be upgraded. ___________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD...
The commander was recommending that applicant receive an honorable discharge. In an effort to study and pass the second final testing, he and his trainer reviewed the CDC course material. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluations and provided letters of recommendation, a letter from his congressman, an application for an Air Force Reserve position, and a letter from the...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00087
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied and states, in part, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice to warrant upgrading his RE code. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the...
AF | DRB | CY2002 | FD2002-0027
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE CASE NUMBER FD62-0027 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for a Change in Reason and Authority for Discharge. The records indicated the applicant failed his CDC Course exam twice and was honorable discharged. RECOMMENDATION: For the reasons stated above, I recommend the respondent be discharged from the United States Air Force under AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-3208, chapter 5, section E, paragraph 5.26.3, with an honorable discharge, without P&R.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-02794
Because he was within his first 180 days of active service, he was given an entry level separation with uncharacterized service. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected by deleting the words “and conduct” from Block 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, issued as a...
AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2002-0279
(Change Digcharge to Reason and Authority for Discharge and Separation code (SPD) Issue 1: I understand that I failed to pass my career development course (CDC), however the separation code on my DD 214 is JHJ, Unsatisfactory Job Performance, which I feel misrepresents why I was separated. In this case, the Respondent’s commander has recommended he receive an honorable discharge. 4, Copies of the documents to be forwarded to the separation authority in support of this recommendation are attached.
AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2002-0377
CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE | pp9097-00 977 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for a change to the character of discharge from general to ho The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), at Andrews Air Hibrce Base, Maryland, on April 1, 2003. h DEPA..TMENT OF THE AIR FORCE | PACIFIC AIR FORCES 18 May 99 MEMORANDUM FOR 18 WG/CC FROM: 18 WG/JA SUBJECT: Legal Review - Administrative Discharge - i, 18 CS (PACAP), Kadena AB,...