Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00378
Original file (BC-2012-00378.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
 

DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-00378 
  
COUNSEL:  NONE 
HEARING DESIRED: NO 

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 
 
IN THE MATTER OF: 
   
 
    
 
   
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 
 
The  character  of  discharge  on  his  DD  Form  214,  Certificate  of 
Release  or  Discharge  from  Active  Duty,  be  changed  from 
uncharacterized to honorable.  
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
 
He was discharged from the military for a disability incurred in 
the  line  of  duty.    His  discharge  was  characterized  as 
uncharacterized; therefore he was denied all benefits.  He feels 
as though his discharge was inequitable because it was based on 
one isolated incident with no other adverse action.   
 
He  was  always  told  that  he  didn’t  qualify  for  benefits  but 
didn’t know why.  He went to school on his own and went on with 
his life always wondering why.  He felt like the military left 
him on his own.   
 
The  applicant  did  not  submit  any  documents  in  support  of  his 
request.   
 
The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.  
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
STATEMENT OF FACTS: 
 
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 3 April 2007.  
On  21  May  2007,  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  Enlistment,  paragraph  5.14  under  Basis  for  Discharge 
for Erroneous Enlistment.  The specific reason for the discharge 
recommendation  was  the  applicant  did  not  meet  the  minimum 
medical standards to enlist and should not have been allowed to 
join  the  Air  Force  because  of  asthma.    On  21  May  2007,  the 
applicant  acknowledged  receipt  of  the  commander’s  intent  to 

(AFI) 

and 

Air 

Force 

Instruction 

discharge him and waived his right to consult counsel and submit 
statements on his own behalf. 
 
Subsequent  to  the  file  being  found  legally  sufficient  the 
discharge authority approved the recommendation and directed the 
applicant  be  discharged  with  an  entry-level  separation.    The 
applicant  was  discharged  effective  29  May  2007,  with  an  entry-
level  separation,  uncharacterized  character  of  service  and  was 
credited with 1 month and 27 days of active duty service.   
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
AETC/SGPS  recommends  denial.    SGPS  states  at  the  time  of  the 
separation the process was in accordance with established policy 
and  administrative  procedures.    Since  the  applicant  does  not 
meet the current medical waiver criteria for military duty they 
do not support his request.   
 
The complete AETC/SGPS evaluation is at Exhibit C. 
 
AFPC/DPSOS  recommends  denial.    DPSOS  states  the  applicant’s 
service characterization is correct as reflected on his DD Form 
214.    Airmen  are  given  entry-level  separation/uncharacterized 
service  characterization  when  separation  is  initiated  in  the 
first  180  days  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, 
the  uncharacterized  character  of  service  on  the  DD  Form  214  is 
correct and in accordance with DoD and Air Force instructions.   
 
The complete AFPC/DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit D. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
Copies  of  the  Air  Force  evaluations  were  forwarded  to  the 
applicant on 18 May 2012 for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit E).  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 not timely filed; however, it is in the 
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.   
 

 

2

3.  Insufficient  relevant  evidence  has  been  presented  to 
demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.  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  as  the  basis  for  our  conclusion  that  the 
applicant  has  not  been  the  victim  of  an  error  or  injustice.  
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  this  application 
BC-2012-00378 in Executive Session on 21 August 2012, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 
 
 
 
 
The following documentary evidence was considered: 
 
    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 26 January 2012. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AETC/SGPS, dated 3 March 2012. 
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 25 April 2012. 
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 May 2012. 
 
 
 
 
                                    
                                   Panel Chair 
 

  Panel Chair 
  Member 
  Member 

 
 

 

3



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04520

    Original file (BC-2011-04520.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04520 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Re-entry (RE) code “4C” “Approved Involuntary Separation for Concealment /Physical Standards/Less than 9.0 RGL,” be changed in order for him to reenlist in the Armed Forces. DPSOS states based on the documentation on file in the master personnel...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00976

    Original file (BC-2011-00976.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    SGPS states a review of the records provided shows the applicant was separated after blood tests demonstrated he had the sickle cell trait. DPSOS states that based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge instruction. The applicant has provided no evidence showing that his discharge is in error or contrary to the prevailing instruction.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-02825

    Original file (BC-2012-02825.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02825 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO IN THE MATTER OF: _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her uncharacterized entry level separation be changed to honorable. DPSOS states that based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01600

    Original file (BC-2013-01600.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01600 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His discharge be changed to honorable and his reentry (RE) code 2C (involuntarily separated with honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service) be changed to 1 to allow him to reenlist. AIR FORCE...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04700

    Original file (BC-2011-04700.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04700 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her character of service be changed from uncharacterized to honorable and her reentry (RE) code “2C” (involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service) be changed to allow her to reenter...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02166

    Original file (BC-2011-02166.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02166 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His entry level separation be changed. However, the Board majority agrees with the opinion and recommendation of AFPC/DPSOS that the applicant does not provide any evidence of an error or injustice in reference to his entry level separation. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2010-01636

    Original file (BC-2010-01636.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01636 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His narrative reason for separation “Fraudulent Entry into Military Service” and, his Reenlistment (RE) code “2C” (involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge, or entry level separation without characterization of service) be changed to allow...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01899

    Original file (BC-2012-01899.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR) which are attached at Exhibits C and D. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AETC/SGPS recommends denial of the applicant’s request to change his RE code. In accordance with DoD and Air Force guidance on entry-level...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03094

    Original file (BC-2007-03094.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The complete AFBCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit F. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations was forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days. Rather, an entry-level separation with uncharacterized service is used in those cases where the member has not yet completed six months of service at the time of separation proceedings were, for whatever...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01705

    Original file (BC-2011-01705.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reiterates her claim that her medical diagnosis does not reflect a Personality Disorder because Axis II shows “None.” In support of her response, the applicant submits documentation already included in her original submission. We believe it would be in the interest of equity and justice and in keeping with...