Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00579
Original file (BC-2012-00579.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-00579 
COUNSEL:  NONE 
HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

 
IN THE MATTER OF: 
 
       
 
       
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 
 
His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active 
Duty be corrected to reflect: 
 
    1.  The  separation  program  designator  (SPD)  code  of  JHF 
(Failure  to  complete  a  course  of  instruction),  rather  than  HMJ 
(Unsuitability – Apathy, Defective Attitude, Inability to Expend 
Efforts Constructively). 
 
    2.  The  narrative  reason  for  separation  as  “Failed  to  meet 
course  standards,”  rather  than  “Unsuitable  Apathy,  Defective 
Attitude - Board Waiver).” 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
 
At the time of his separation he did not understand the negative 
impact  of  the  separation  code  and  narrative  reason  for 
separation.    If  he  had  understood  the  negative  impact  of  his 
separation  code  and  narrative  reason  for  separation,  he  would 
have sought counsel.  He was young and naïve.  He believes the 
inaccuracies  on  his  DD  Form  214  may  hinder  future  employment 
opportunities. 
 
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: 
 
On  27  Aug  79,  the  applicant  contracted  his  enlistment  in  the 
Regular Air Force. 
 
On 8 Apr 80, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was 
recommending his discharge from the Air Force for unsuitability, 
apathy  and  defective  attitude,  or  inability  to  expend  effort 
constructively.    The  specific  reasons  for  the  discharge  action 

were  the  applicant  received  numerous  counseling’s,  memorandums 
regarding his behavior, appearance, and defective attitude toward 
training and learning.  He was also disenrolled from the aircraft 
maintenance course and was not recommended for promotion. 
 
His  commander  advised  him  of  his  rights  in  this  matter.    On 
10 Apr 80, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification 
and, after consulting with legal counsel, submitted a conditional 
waiver  of  his  right  to  an  administrative  discharge  board 
contingent upon his receipt of an honorable discharge. 
 
On  8  May  80,  the  legal  office  reviewed  the  case  and  found  it 
legally sufficient and recommended the discharge authority accept 
the  applicant’s  conditional  waiver,  and  that  he  be  furnished  an 
honorable discharge. 
 
The  discharge  authority  concurred  with  the  findings  and 
recommendations  and  directed  the  applicant  be  furnished  an 
honorable discharge without probation and rehabilitation.  He was 
discharged on 8 May 80 and credited with 8 months and 12 days of 
active service. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial noting 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 separation code or narrative reason for separation.  
Furthermore,  based  on  the  documentation  on  file  in  the  master 
personnel  records,  the  discharge,  to  include  the  applicant's 
characterization  of  service,  was  consistent  with  the  procedural 
and  substantive  requirements  of  the  discharge  manual  and  was 
within the discretion of the discharge authority. 
 
The complete AFPC/DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit C. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant 
on 27 Apr 12, for review and comment within 30 days.  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 

information 

of 

post-service 

activities 

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 an error or an 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 
and  adopt  its  rationale  as  the  basis  for  our  conclusion  the 
applicant  has  not  been  the  victim  of  an  error  or  injustice.  
Based  on  the  available  evidence  of  record,  it  appears  the 
applicant’s honorable discharge for unsuitability was consistent 
with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and 
within the discharge authority’s discretion.  He has provided no 
evidence  which  would  lead  us  to  believe  his  discharge  was 
improper  or  contrary  to  the  provisions  of  the  governing 
directive,  or  the  SPD  code  and  narrative  reason  for  separation 
issued in conjunction with it were erroneous or inappropriately 
assigned.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, 
we conclude that no basis exists to upgrade the applicant’s UOTHC 
discharge.    In  the  interest  of  justice,  we  also  considered 
upgrading on the basis of clemency; however, he has not provided 
sufficient 
and 
accomplishments for us to conclude that his discharge should be 
upgraded  based  on  this  basis.    Therefore,  in  the  absence  of 
documentation concerning his post-service activities, we find no 
basis  to  recommend  granting  the  relief  sought  in  this 
application. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
The  following  members  of  the  Board  considered  AFBCMR  Docket 
Number BC-2012-00579 in Executive Session on 6 Sep 12, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 
 
 
 
 
 
The following documentary evidence was considered: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 7 Feb 12, w/atch. 
Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Military Personnel Records. 
Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, 23 Apr 12. 
Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Apr 12. 

   Panel Chair 
   Member 
   Member 

  
Panel Chair 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 

3 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00219

    Original file (BC-2010-00219.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00219 INDEX CODE: 110.00; 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The narrative reason for separation - “Unsuitable Apathy Defective Attitude” and the separation code of SPD-JMJ be removed from his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. The applicant was...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00282

    Original file (BC-2007-00282.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The commander advised applicant that military counsel had been obtained to assist him and a record of the consultation will be made by military counsel and placed in the case file The commander stated in the recommendation for discharge that he was recommending the applicant receive a general (under honorable conditions) discharge without probation and rehabilitation. AFPC/DPPRS complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPPR recommends the request for the PH be denied. After thoroughly...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1998-00826

    Original file (BC-1998-00826.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Evaluation in the disability evaluation system should have followed where the most likely recommendation would have been unfit for duty. A complete copy of the Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C. The Physical Disability Division, AFPC/DPPD, reviewed this application and recommended denial. A complete copy of the DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9800826

    Original file (9800826.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The fact is, the applicant presented himself to mental health services during his period of service with apparently bonafide evidence of psychotic hallucinations/behavior and this was not considered in his discharge processing. A complete copy of the DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to applicant on 17 Aug 98 for review and response....

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-01628

    Original file (BC-2009-01628.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-01628 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be corrected as follows: 1. In response to the Board’s request, the FBI indicated that on the basis of the data furnished they were unable to identify with an...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080012256

    Original file (20080012256.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 26 August 1981, the applicant’s immediate commander initiated a Bar to Enlistment/Reenlistment Certificate against the applicant citing his three instances of nonjudicial punishment and extensive history of counseling. This form further shows he completed 4 years and 9 months of creditable active military service. XXX _________________________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03508

    Original file (BC-2004-03508.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    ___________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 20 Jun 77, for a period of four years in the grade of airman basic. He recommended applicant be discharged from the Air Force with a general discharge and that he be considered for rehabilitation under the provisions of AFM 39-12, Chapter 4. Applicant was discharged on 11 Jul 80, in the grade of airman, under the provisions of AFM 39-12, Unsuitable-Apathy,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03103

    Original file (BC-2007-03103.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-03103 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NOT INDICATED HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His characterization of service be upgraded from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. We considered...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00659

    Original file (BC-2013-00659.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00659 COUNSEL: NO HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to Honorable. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility which is attached at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 00659

    Original file (BC 2013 00659.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00659 COUNSEL: NO HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to Honorable. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility which is attached at Exhibit...