Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00534
Original file (BC-2012-00534.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

b.  On 22 Feb 11, he failed Block 4, Unit 3, Test A, with a 

DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-00534  
COUNSEL:  NONE 
HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

 
 
IN THE MATTER OF: 
 
    
 
   
 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 
 
His Narrative Reason for Separation, as reflected on his DD Form 
214,  Certificate  of  Release  or  Discharge  from  Active  Duty,  be 
changed to remove the words “Unsatisfactory Performance.”  
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
 
One  of  his  best  friends  from  Basic  Training  committed  suicide 
and  both  his  grandmother  and  grandfather  died  while  he  was  in 
the Air Force.  It was a very traumatic experience; as a result, 
he failed some tests.  
 
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 entered the Air Force on 9 Nov 10. 
 
On  7  Jun  11,  the  applicant’s  commander  notified  him  of  her 
intent  to  discharge  him  from  the  Air  Force  for  unsatisfactory 
performance.  The  reason  for  the  action  was  that  he  was 
disenrolled from the Aerospace Propulsion Apprentice Course due 
to academic failure.  The minimum passing score for a block test 
is 70 percent, however: 
 
 
score of 60 percent. 
 
 
score of 60 percent. 
 

a.  On 24 Jan 11, he failed Block 1, Unit 9, Test A, with a 

d.  On 4 Apr 11, he failed Block 6, Unit 7, Test A, with a 

c.  On 28 Feb 11, he failed Block 4, Unit 3, Test A, with a 

 
score of 55 percent.   
 
 
score of 45 percent.   
 
 
e.  Prior to his disenrollment, he washed back and received 
six  hours  of  special  individual  assistance  and  two  additional 
hours of counseling.   
 
On  7  Jun  11,  the  applicant  acknowledged  receipt  of  the  action 
and  waived  his  right  to  legal  counsel  and  to  submit  statements 
in his behalf. 
 
On 15 Jun 11, the case was found to be legally sufficient.   
 
On  21  Jun  11  the  discharge  authority  concurred  with  the 
commander’s  recommendation  and  directed  the  applicant’s 
discharge;  he  was  Honorably  discharged  with  a  Narrative  Reason 
for  Separation  of  Unsatisfactory  Performance,  and  was  credited 
with 7 months and 13 days of active service. 
 
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
described  in  the  letter  prepared  by  the  Air  Force  office  of 
primary responsibility (OPR) which is attached at Exhibits C. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of 
an error or injustice.  There is no evidence of an error in the 
processing  of  the  discharge  action,  and  the  applicant  did  not 
submit  any  evidence.    The  discharge  was  consistent  with  the 
procedural  and  substantive  requirements  of  the  discharge 
instruction  and  was  within  the  discretion  of  the  discharge 
authority.  
 
A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit C. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
A  copy  of  the  Air  Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the 
applicant on 1 May 12 for review and comment within 30 days.  As 
of  this  date,  no  response  has  been  received  by  this  office 
(Exhibit D). 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 

 

 

2 

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  opinion  and 
recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility 
(OPR)  and  adopt  its  rationale  as  the  basis  for  our  conclusion 
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  the  evidence  presented  did  not 
demonstrate  the  existence  of  material  error  or  injustice;  the 
applicant  was  denied  without  a  personal  appearance;  and  the 
application  will  only  be  reconsidered  upon  the  submission  of 
newly  discovered  relevant  evidence  not  considered  with  the 
application.    
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
The  following  members  of  the  Board  considered  AFBCMR  Docket 
Number  BC-2012-00534  in  Executive  Session  on  16  Aug  12,  under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 
 
 
 
 
 
The following documentary evidence was considered: 
 
     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 16 Jan 12, w/atch. 
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 23 Apr 12. 
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 May 12. 
 
 
 
 
   
   

   Panel Chair 
   Member 
   Member 

     
  Panel Chair  

 

3 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00821

    Original file (BC-2011-00821.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00821 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. The applicant did not provide any supporting evidence of an error or injustice that would warrant a change in his RE code. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02099

    Original file (BC-2012-02099.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    She was discharged from the Air Force because she failed training and the Air Force would not reclassify her. Her commander initiated separation action on 11 Mar 2010, which gave her 178 days active duty at the time her separation action was initiated. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC- 2012-02099 in Executive Session on 20 Dec 2012, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC 2010 02763

    Original file (BC 2010 02763.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02763 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His uncharacterized service be changed to honorable. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial, stating, in part, based on the documentation in the master personnel records, the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04645

    Original file (BC-2010-04645.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04645 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: While it is not readily apparent, it appears as though the applicant is requesting that his entry-level separation with uncharacterized service be upgraded to an honorable discharge, and his Reentry (RE) code of 2C (Entry level separation...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00351

    Original file (BC-2012-00351.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The four test failures were evidence of her lack of motivation. The complete DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: While it is true she was counseled multiple times for her failures, she would like to make it clear that her academic deficiencies are not because of her lack of motivation. She failed this course, but it does not mean she would fail out of every course of study in the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04664

    Original file (BC-2010-04664.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04664 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The narrative reason for separation on her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be changed to reflect “Convenience of the Government,” rather than “Unsatisfactory Performance,” so she may be eligible for Montgomery GI...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02097

    Original file (BC-2011-02097.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02097 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her reentry (RE) code of 2C which denotes “Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service” and separation program designator (SPD) codes be changed so that she can serve again in the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-03505

    Original file (BC-2010-03505.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 12 Jan 04, the applicant received an uncharacterized entry- level separation, with a reason for separation of entry level performance and conduct, and was issued an RE code of 2C. The applicant did not provide any evidence or identify any errors or injustices in the discharge processing, warranting a change to his narrative reason for separation and separation code. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-01380

    Original file (BC-2009-01380.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Examiner’s Note: The Air Force office of primary responsibility has identified the applicant’s correct reentry code should have been 2C (involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibits C &...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02001

    Original file (BC-2011-02001.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was honorably discharged effective 7 April 2010 for unsatisfactory performance with an RE code of “2C.” The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force at Exhibits C and D. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOS and DPSOA reviewed this application and recommend denial. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging...