RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04614 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: YES 

 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

The narrative reason for separation on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be changed 
from “unsatisfactory performance” to “medical discharge.” 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

Because he was discharged with a service connected disability 
his discharge was honorable, not for unsatisfactory performance. 
The Department of Veteran Affairs (DVA) rated his disability at 
10 percent. He can’t qualify for his full Post-9/11 GI Bill 
benefits unless his records show he was honorably discharged. 

 

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

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 
21 Oct 98. 

 

On 17 May 02, the applicant was honorably discharged with a 
narrative reason for separation of “unsatisfactory performance,” 
and was credited with 3 years, 6 months, and 27 days of total 
active service. 

 

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

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of 
an error or injustice. On 26 Apr 02, the applicant’s commander 



notified him he was recommending him for discharge from the Air 
Force for unsatisfactory performance. Specifically, the 
applicant failed his Career Development Course (CDC) examination 
on two occasions with scores of 52 and then 59 percent, while 
the minimum passing score was 65. The applicant acknowledged 
receipt of the notification of discharge and was afforded the 
opportunity to consult with counsel and submit a statement on 
his own behalf. The base legal office reviewed the case and 
found it legally sufficient to support the basis for the 
discharge. The discharge authority approved the separation and 
directed an honorable discharge without probation and 
rehabilitation. The applicant was afforded ample opportunity to 
overcome his deficiencies. The applicant’s records revealed no 
error or injustice in the processing of the discharge action and 
he has provided no facts warranting a change to his narrative 
reason for separation. 

 

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR 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 24 Feb 13 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. 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 
(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 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 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-2012-04614 in Executive Session on 4 Jun 13, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 Panel Chair 

 Member 

 Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 28 Sep 12, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 11 Feb 13. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Feb 13.