RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01146 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: YES 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His uncharacterized entry-level separation be changed to an 
honorable discharge. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

At the time of his discharge, he was told that in 30 days there 
would be no record of his enlistment. However, he recently 
discovered the DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge 
from Active Duty, which he received, would follow him for the 
rest of his life. Unless the character of service is changed to 
honorable, he will not be able to move forward in the hiring 
process with the local police department to serve and protect his 
hometown. He has always wanted a job in law enforcement; 
however, he entered the Air Force as an Avionics Guidance and 
Control Systems helper. He was only able to complete a few 
blocks in technical school before he washed out due to poor test 
scores. While he had the opportunity to retrain into another 
career field; regrettably, he chose to be discharged. He would be 
grateful if the Board would correct his record so he can pursue 
his dream in law enforcement. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of his 
DD Form 214. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 30 November 
1992. 

 

On 16 April 1993, the commander notified the member that he was 
being discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 
39-10, Administrative Separation of Airmen – Entry Level 
Performance and Conduct. The commander recommended the applicant 
receive an uncharacterized entry-level separation. The specific 
reasons for this action were: 1) On 23 February 1993, he failed 
Block II exam with a score of 68; 2) On 23 March 1993, he 


received a low score of 70; 3) On 7 April 1993, he failed Block 
VI exam with a score of 63; 4) On 9 April 1993, he was eliminated 
from technical training by the commander for academic deficiency. 

 

The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of 
discharge, consulted with counsel and waived his right to submit 
statements in his own behalf. The base legal office reviewed the 
case and found it legally sufficient to support separation. They 
recommended he be separated with an entry-level separation 
without probation or rehabilitation. The discharge authority 
approved the separation and directed that he be separated with an 
uncharacterized entry-level separation without probation or 
rehabilitation. 

 

On 22 April 1993, the applicant was involuntarily discharged 
under the provisions of AFR 39-10, with an uncharacterized entry-
level separation. He served 4 months and 23 days of total active 
military service. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial of the applicant’s request. DPSOS 
states the applicant did not provide any evidence of an error or 
injustice in the processing of his discharge warranting a change 
to his character of service, separation code or narrative reason 
for separation. 

 

The complete DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

The applicant states he accepted the opportunity to leave the 
military; however, he did not realize the “uncharacterized” 
designation on his DD Form would have negative consequences later 
in his life. On several occasions, he has applied for positions 
that required a background investigation; however, they would 
stop the process once the employer realized he had an 
uncharacterized designation on his record. The police agency he 
has applied for employment required that he have a general 
discharge rather than an uncharacterized one. 

 

The applicant’s complete response 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 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. The discharge 
appears to be in compliance with the governing instruction and we 
find no evidence to indicate that his separation was 
inappropriate. Airman are given entry-level separation/ 
uncharacterized service characterization when separation is 
initiated in the first 180 days of continuous active service. 
The Department of Defense (DoD) determined if a member served 
less than 180 days continuous active service, it would be unfair 
to the member and the service to characterize their limited 
service. Therefore, his uncharacterized service is correct and 
in accordance with DoD and Air Force instructions. 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 issue(s) 
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 a 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-2010-01146 in Executive Session on 17 November 2010, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

Panel Chair 

Member 

Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 14 Mar 10, w/atch. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 17 Sep 10. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Oct 10. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 8 Nov 10. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair