RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00532 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: YES 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

The following changes be made to his DD Form 214, Certificate of 
Release or Discharge from Active Duty: 

 

 1. Block 12h (Record of Service) (Effective Date of Pay 
Grade) to reflect the date he entered the service. 

 

 2. Block 14 (Military Education) to reflect the completion 
of his technical training in Security Forces. 

 

 3. Block 24 (Character of Service) to reflect “honorable” 
rather than “uncharacterized.” 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He would like his DD Form 214 to reflect an honorable discharge 
to be eligible for Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) 
educational benefits. 

 

He would like his technical training with Security Forces (Police 
Academy) included on his DD Form 214, despite the fact he was one 
week shy of completion. 

 

His service entry date should reflect the date he started getting 
paid, in the Fall 1998. 

 

These corrections will give him better 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 3 Mar 99, the applicant entered active duty in the Air 
National Guard (ANG). On 23 Jul 99, he received an 
uncharacterized entry level separation by reason of entry level 


performance conduct. He served on active duty in the ANG for 
4 months and 21 days. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

NGB/A1PS recommends denial. A1PS states that they concur with 
the NGB Subject Matter Expert (SME). The SME states the 
applicant has provided no supporting documentation to show an 
error or injustice has occurred. 

 

The SME states in accordance with AFI 36-3208, Administrative 
Separation of Airmen, an entry level separation is defined as 
“airmen that are in entry level status during the first 180 days 
of continuous active military service or the first 180 days of 
continuous active military service after a break of more than 
92 days of active service. If a member is in entry level status 
when the discharge is initiated the separation is described as an 
entry level separation. The applicant’s DD Form 214 reflects he 
entered active duty on 3 Mar 99 and was separated on 23 Jul 99. 
An entry level separation does not qualify as an honorable or 
general discharge as the characterization of service is, in 
effect, uncharacterized. The applicant did not serve on active 
duty long enough to determine the overall service 
characterization. 

 

The date reflected in Block 12h (Effective Date of Pay Grade), 
29 Dec 98, reflects the date he stated getting paid and 
therefore, satisfies the applicant’s request to have his entry 
service date corrected. This time is “Inactive Service” and 
would not be included in entry level status. Entry level status 
is for time on active military service. 

 

It is not common practice to award and document training unless 
that training was completed. If a Certificate of Training cannot 
be provided reflecting completion of the course, the training 
would not be included on a DD Form 214. 

 

The complete A1PS evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit B. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

On 25 Mar 11, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to 
the applicant for review and comment within 30 days. To date, a 
response has not been received (Exhibit C). 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 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 that 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. 

 

4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not 
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel 
will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved. 
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: 

 

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that 
the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 
that 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 Docket Number 
BC-2011-00532 in Executive Session on 21 Jul 11, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 4 Feb 11, w/atch. 

 Exhibit B. Letter, NGB/A1PS, dated 1 Mar 11. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Mar 11. 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair