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. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He did not do anything to deserve an uncharacterized discharge. 
He failed out of a class and was discharged. It is his goal to 
go back into the military and he feels that this could hinder 
him. 

 

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a copy of his 
DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active 
Duty, issued in conjunction with his 16 Jun 10 discharge. 

 

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

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained 
in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air 
Force. Accordingly, there is no need to recite these facts in 
this Record of Proceedings. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial, stating, in part, based on the 
documentation in the master personnel records, the discharge to 
include the service characterization was appropriately 
administered and within the discretion of the discharge 
authority. The applicant did not provide any evidence that an 
error or injustice occurred in the processing of his discharge 
warranting a change to his character of service. 


 

The applicant was recommended for administrative discharge 
action for entry-level performance or conduct. The reason for 
the proposed action was his academic elimination from the 
Aerospace Ground Equipment Apprentice Course, specifically, he 
failed Block 4, Unit 5, Test a, and Block 5, Unit 3, Test a, 
with scores of 60 percent and 45 percent respectively. Prior to 
disenrollment, the applicant was counseled concerning his 
performance, received five hours of additional instruction and 
received written counseling and reprimands concerning his 
academic deficiencies. Efforts to improve his performance were 
met with negative results. The Flight Academic Review Board 
recommended discharge. The discharge authority directed 
discharge with an uncharacterized entry-level separation. 

 

They also note that airmen are given entry-level 
separation/uncharacterized service characterization when the 
separation is initiated in the first 180 days of continuous 
active service. The Department of Defense (DoD) determined that 
if a member served less than 180 days continuous service, it 
would be unfair to the member and the service to characterize 
their limited service. Therefore, the uncharacterized character 
of service resulting in the RE code of 2C is correct and in 
accordance with DoD and Air Force instructions. 

 

The complete 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 17 Dec 10 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 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 injustice. After 
careful consideration of applicant's request and the available 
evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or 
injustice to warrant corrective action. The facts and opinions 
stated in the advisory opinion appear to be based on the 
evidence of record and have not been adequately rebutted by the 


applicant. Absent persuasive evidence the applicant was denied 
rights to which he was entitled, appropriate regulations were 
not followed, or appropriate standards were not applied, we find 
no basis to disturb the existing record. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

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-2010-02763 in Executive Session on 3 March 2011, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 20 Jul 10, w/atch. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

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

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Dec 10. 

 
 

 Panel Chair