Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03636
Original file (BC-2012-03636.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03636 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

Her entry level separation (ELS) for “failed medical/physical 
procurement standards” be changed to a medical discharge. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

To say she should never have been allowed in the Air Force 
because of her condition and that her discharge should be for 
erroneous enlistment is wrong. She never had a back problem a 
day in her life until she began running a month or two before 
basic training. She believed she was running wrong and that was 
the cause of her pain because the pain never lasted longer than 
a day. No one would have caught her medical problem with her 
spine unless she had Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) because 
that was the only way anterolisthesis can be found. She didn’t 
know she had a chronic condition. 

 

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

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant initially entered the Air Force on 18 Jul 11. 

 

On 3 Oct 11, the applicant’s commander notified her that he was 
recommending her for discharge for erroneous enlistment. The 
reason for this action was her medical narrative summary, dated 
6 Sep 11, stated she did not meet minimum medical standards to 
enlist due to lumbar disk degeneration. The applicant 
acknowledged receipt and waived her right to legal counsel and 
to submit statements. 

 

On 4 Oct 11, the action was reviewed and determined to be 
legally sufficient, and the discharge authority directed the 
applicant be furnished an ELS for erroneous enlistment in 
accordance with AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of 
Airmen. 


On 5 Oct 11, the applicant was furnished an ELS with 
uncharacterized service for “failed medical/physical procurement 
standards,” assigned a Reentry (RE) code of 4C (Concealment of 
juvenile records; or minority, or failure to meet physical 
standards; or failure to obtain 9.0 reading grade), and was 
credited with 2 months and 18 days of active service. 

 

The relevant facts pertaining to this application are described 
in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary 
responsibility which are included at Exhibits C and D. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of 
an error or injustice. The applicant should not have been 
allowed to join the Air Force because she had lumbar disc 
degeneration. Had the Air Force known of this condition at the 
time of the applicant’s enlistment, she would not have been 
allowed entry. Although the applicant states she has finished 
treatment and can return to the Air Force, her medical condition 
does not meet accession standards. The discharge was consistent 
with the procedural and substantive requirements of the 
discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the 
discharge authority. Airmen are given ELS with uncharacterized 
service when separation is initiated in the first 180 days of 
continuous active service. The Department of Defense (DoD) 
determined it would be unfair to the member and the service to 
characterize a member’s limited service when separation is 
initiated within the first 180 days of active service. 
Therefore, her discharge was in accordance with DoD and Air 
Force guidance. 

 

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

AETC/SGPS recommends denial of the applicant’s request to change 
her RE code, indicating there is no evidence of an error or 
injustice. Her medical defect may have gone unnoticed prior to 
military service and was aggravated by the strenuous physical 
activity prompting her to seek medical care. As her condition 
may become chronic over time, she was disapproved for a waiver 
and disqualified from military service. The separation was 
carried out in accordance with established policy and 
administrative procedures. She does not meet the current 
medical criteria for military duty. 

 

A complete copy of the AETC/SGPS evaluation is at Exhibit D. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

 

 

 

 


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the 
applicant on 29 Oct 12 for review and comment within 30 days. 
As of this date, no response has been received by this office 
(Exhibit D). 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

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. 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. 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 
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2012-03636 in Executive Session on 2 Apr 13, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 Panel Chair 

 Member 

 Member 

 

 


The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2012-03636 was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 13 Aug 12, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 25 Sep 12. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, AETC/SGPS, dated 24 Oct 12. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Oct 12. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair 

 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01924

    Original file (BC 2013 01924.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01924 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her uncharacterized discharge be changed to reflect an honorable discharge. ________________________________________________________________ _ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force who served on active duty...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03162

    Original file (BC 2014 03162.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibits C and D. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. Airmen are given Entry Level Separation and Uncharacterized service characterization when separation is initiated within the first 180 days of continuous active service. A complete...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02975

    Original file (BC-2012-02975.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant’s military personnel records indicate he enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 03 Feb 09. Airmen are given entry-level separation with uncharacterized service when separation is initiated within the first 180 days of continuous active service. While the applicant’s military personnel records indicate that he was erroneously issued an RE code of 4C, his correct RE code should be...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04255

    Original file (BC 2013 04255.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibits C, D, and E. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AETC/SGPS recommends denial of the applicant’s request to change his RE code to reflect eligibility for reenlistment, medical discharge, or medical separation, indicating there is no evidence of an error or an...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05799

    Original file (BC 2013 05799.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05799 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, block 28, narrative reason, be changed from “failed medical/physical procurement standards,” to an appropriate status that indicates he was discharged for an injury incurred while on active duty. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03479

    Original file (BC 2014 03479.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 10 Aug 07, she was discharged with a narrative reason for separation of “Erroneous entry (other)” and a RE code of “2C.” AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AETC/SGPS recommends denial of the applicant’s requests to change her separation and RE codes. It has been seven years since she was discharged from the service and she did not provide a reason why the application was not submitted within three years of her discharge. The applicant did not file within three years after the alleged error or...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00982

    Original file (BC 2014 00982.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant’s DD Form 214, Certification for Release or Discharge from Active Duty, issued in conjunction with her 22 Mar 07 entry level separation, reflects that she received a narrative reason for separation of “Failed Medical/Physical Procurement Standards,” with an RE code of 4C. The complete DPOSR evaluation is at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 12 Nov 14 for review and comment within 30...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03259

    Original file (BC 2013 03259 .txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 20 May 2013, after her separation she saw an allergist and included his letter noting there was no reaction when she ingested shrimp. The complete SGPS evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial of the applicant’s request to change her narrative reason for separation. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01801

    Original file (BC 2014 01801.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board should waive the untimely filing in the interest of justice because it was her understanding when she filed her claim (in 2008) that she would receive an updated DD Form 214. The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 20 Jun 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03113

    Original file (BC 2014 03113.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 12 May 2014, the discharge authority approved the recommendation that the applicant be discharged. DPSOR did not find any evidence of any errors or injustices in the discharge process. A complete copy of the BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit E. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 18 June 2015 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit F).