RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-02290

  						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He would like his uncharacterized discharge changed to general (under honorable conditions).

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He has been pursuing a career in law enforcement.  However, throughout his pursuit, he has learned that many of the local law enforcement agencies require that military discharges be honorable or general (UHC).

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant entered active duty into the Regular Air Force on 18 June 2013.

On 22 July 2013, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was recommending him for discharge from the Air Force for erroneous enlistment – failure to meet Air Force physical standards under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, Chapter 5, Section C, Defective Enlistments, Para 5.14  (Erroneous Enlistment) with a discharge described as an entry level separation.  The commander received a medical narrative summary, dated 12 July 2013, which found the applicant did not meet the minimum medical standards to enlist.  The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge and was afforded the opportunity to consult with legal counsel and submit statements in his own behalf.  The base separations authority approved the entry level separation and uncharacterized service characterization.

On 24 July 2013, the applicant received an entry-level separation, with a character of service of uncharacterized, a narrative reason for separation of discharged failed medical/physical procurement standards, and was credited with 1 month and 7 days of active service.   

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C.    

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOR-SEP recommends denial.  Based on the documentation on file in the master of personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge instruction and was within the discretion of the discharge authority.  

The medical authorities examined the applicant and diagnosed him with astigmatism (>3 diopters).  This was considered to be a disqualifying physical condition that did not meet Air Force standards and it was recommended that the applicant be administratively separated.  Based on the recommendation, both the commander and the discharge authority concluded that discharge was in order and they must concur with the decision in this case. Therefore, the SPD code and narrative reason for separation are correct as indicated on the applicant’s DD Form 214.  Additionally, the applicant’s service characterization is also correct as reflected on his DD Form 214.  In this regard, 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.  Consequently, they did not find any evidence of any errors or injustices in the discharge processing.
 
A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR-SEP 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 30 June 2015 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D).  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 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 OPR and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion 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-2015-02290 in Executive Session on 7 April 2016 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 26 May 15, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR-SEP, dated 9 Jun 15.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Jun 15.