RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01801

					COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO 


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her character of service be changed from “uncharacterized” to 
“honorable.”


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her record of service is listed as honorable as well as her 
service verification letter, so her character of service should be 
changed.

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

According to her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge 
from Active Duty, issued in conjunction with her 20 Sep 06 
separation, the applicant entered the Regular Air Force on 13 Jun 
06.

On 20 Sep 06, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of 
AFI 36-3208, Separation of Airmen, with a reason for separation of 
“failed medical/physical procurement standards,” with 
uncharacterized service.  She was credited with 3 months and 8 
days of active duty service.


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AETC/SGPS does not provide a recommendation and indicates based on 
the documentation on file, the applicant’s separation was done in 
accordance with established policy and administrative procedures.  

A review of the records reflects while in Basic Military Training 
(BMT) she was seen for low back pain (Lumbago) and it precluded 
her from completing training.  She states she understood the 
diagnoses and treatment plan and subsequently she was processed 
for an entry level separation.  After separation she applied for 
and was granted a Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) disability 
of 10 percent.  She is not disputing her medical diagnoses, but 
her type of discharge.  

The complete SGPS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial indicating that based on the 
documentation on file in the master personnel records, the 
discharge to include the separation code, narrative reason for 
separation and character of service 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 her discharge.

The discharge was in accordance with the discharge regulation. The 
applicant's service characterization is also correct as reflected 
on her 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 
her DD Form 214 is correct and in accordance with DoD and Air 
Force instructions.

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).  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.  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.  We took 
notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the 
merits of the case; however, while we note that SGPS did not 
render a recommendation, 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 that the 
applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice.  
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no 
basis to recommend granting the requested relief.


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-2014-01801 in Executive Session on 11 Mar 15 under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 23 Apr 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Pertinent Excerpts from Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AETC/SGPS, dated 23 May 14.
Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 2 Jun 14.
Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 Jun 14.