AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE MATTER OF:
DOCKET NUMBER: 97-03283
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
j-SEP 1 4
~
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His narrative reason for separation be changed from marginal
performer to family hardship.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
At the time of his request to be separated, he provided
documentation indicating a family hardship existed due- to his
father's illness and was told that the documents would be taken
into consideration. He is requesting this correction because he
is finding it difficult to achieve a career change.
In support of his request, the applicant submits a personal
statement, a congres&ional inquiry and additional documents
associated with the issues cited in his contentions (Exhibit A).
~~
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant's military personnel records reflect that he enlisted
in the Regular Air Force on 4 June 1982 for a period of 4 years.
On 1 July 1982, applicant was notified he was being recommended
for discharge by his commander for marginal performance. The
applicant was honorably discharged on 6 T u l y 1982 under the
provisions of AFR 39-10 (marginal performer assigned to initial
training). He had completed a total of 1 month and 3 days and
was serving in the grade of airman basic (E-1) at the time of
discharge. He received an RE Code of 2P, which defined means
"Separated involuntarily under AFR 39-10 as marginal performer."
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Directorate of Personnel program Management, HQ AFPC/DPPRS,
stated that the case has been reviewed for separation processing
and there are no errors or irregularities causing-an injustice to
the applicant .
The reason for discharge is appropriate and
complies with directive in effect at the time of his discharge.
DPPRS stated that his application for hardship discharge was
reviewed by the discharge authority prior to applicant's
,
involuntary discharge being initiated and was disapproved. DPPRS
stated that the applicant did not identify any specific errors in
the discharge processing nor provide facts which warrant a change
in his narrative reason for separation.
DPPRS recommended
applicant's request be denied (Exhibit C) .
>-
+.
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant reviewed the advisory opinion and indicated he was
never aware that his discharge from the Air Force was done
involuntarily. He had been of the understanding that he was
being discharged because of an illness in his family and that it
had affected his ability to continue in basic training. While he
was not directly involved in the initiation of a prank in the
dorm, it is true that he was aware of the incident and, as a
result, he was recycled. He does not recall if his application
came before or after he had been recycled; however, the fact that
he had been sent back in training was not the basis for his
request for discharge.
He provided substantial documentation
that his father was ill and needed his assistance to maintain the
family business. While the memo indicates that there was not
sufficient justification provided for the approval of his
hardship discharge, the fact that his father later died as a
result of this illness certainly should be considered. Other
than the Chaplain and a "tech-sergeant", he does not recall
seeing any other counselors. In 1988, he did attempt to have the
narrative reason for separation changed, but never received a
reply.
A complete copy of this response is appended at
Exhibit E .
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. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to
demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice. It was
noted that, at the time the applicant initially requested a
hardship discharge, he submitted a statement from the family
physician detailing his father's medical condition; however, his
request was disapproved.
After reviewing the applicant's
submission concerning his family's situation during the time he
was on active duty, we believe that approval of the requested
relief is appropriate.
It appears that subsequent to the
applicant's entry on extended active duty, hi9 father's poor
health deteriorated dramatically. His mother was unable to take
over the family business and his parents were at a risk of losing
the family business and becoming financially ruined. Under the
circumstances, it is understandable that the applicant's
2
97-03283
preoccupation with his family‘s situation affected his
performance. The applicant‘s post-service career accomplishments
were noted and, in our opinion, his accomplishments do not
reflect a marginal performer.
In view of the foregoing, we
believe it would be in the interest of justice to removi3”the
stigma associated with his narrative reason for separation.
Accordingly, we recommend that the applicant‘s records be
corrected to show he was voluntarily discharged because of
hardship with the assignment of the corresponding separation and
RE codes.
-
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 6 July 1982,
he was honorably discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-10,
paragraph 3-25 (Hardship), with a separation code of KDB and a
reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 4A.
The following members of the Board considered this application in
Executive Session on 9 June 1998, under the provisions of AFI
36-2603:
Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Panel Chair
Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Member
Mr. Kenneth L. Reinertson, Member
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The
following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 28 Oct 97, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter,, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 11 Dec 97.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 22 Dec 97.
Exhibit E. Letter from applicant, dated98 Dec 97.
3
97-0328 3
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01435
_________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 17 November 1950, he was honorably discharged and furnished an Honorable Discharge Certificate. Exhibit B. THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ Chair AFBCMR BC-2006-01435 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02627
On 11 December 1984, the applicant received notification that he was being recommended for discharge due to his referral and subsequent failure to successfully complete a program of rehabilitation for alcohol abuse and his lack of potential for continued military service, as evidenced by the incidents cited above. (Exhibit C) ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR medical consultant found that no change in applicant’s record was...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03244
The discharge authority approved the recommended separation and the applicant was honorably discharged on 21 Jul 80. The complete DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force Evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days on 1 Dec 06. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02506
On 9 October 1979, the applicant received a Letter of Counseling regarding his job performance. On 17 December 1979, he was discharged under honorable conditions under the provisions of AFR 39-12 (Unsuitable - Personality Disorder). After careful consideration of the applicant’s request and the available evidence of record, we see no evidence that would warrant an upgrade of his discharge to honorable.
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). ~ ~ DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR HEADQUARTERS AIR FORCE PERSONNEL RANDOLPH AIR FORCE BASE TEXAS I i U.S. AIR FORCE I ~ s,, MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR FROM HQ AFPCDPPRS 550 C Street West Ste 11 Randolph AFB 7X 78 150-47 13 i DEC 1 6 887 1 9 4 7 - 1 9 9 7 SUBJECT: Application for Correction of Military Records The applicant, while serving in the...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00717
On 1 October 1992, applicant voluntarily submitted an AF Form 31, Airman's Request for Early Separation/Separation Based on Change in Service Obligation requesting to be separated from active duty effective 5 December 1992. in Business Management and Economics.” On 5 December 1992, the applicant was separated from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Administrative Separation of Airmen (voluntary - miscellaneous reasons), with an RE code of 3A and an honorable discharge. ...
Applicant states in his appeal that his “intention has been to separate from the Air Force’’ upon completion of his ADSC from UPT, ever, when he was selected for a follow-on September 199 assignment to :AFB, applicant was given the opportunity to state his intent by declining the assignment in writing at the time he received his initial relocation briefing. We agree with the Air Force that the applicant was made aware of the five-year C-130 IQT ADSC at the time of his relocation briefing. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02163
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02163 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to honorable. However, he has provided no evidence showing his discharge was improper or contrary to the provisions of the governing regulation at the time it was...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-04002
The applicant was discharged from the Air Force on 7 December 1964 under the provisions of AFR 39-16 (apathy and defective attitude) and received an under honorable conditions (general) discharge. While reviewing the applicant’s records, it was discovered that there was an error on his DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States, Report of Transfer or Discharge, effective 7 December 1964. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01750
After a thorough review of the available records, we found no evidence that the RE Code assigned at the time of the applicant’s separation was contrary to the governing regulation or unjust. At the time a member is separated from the Air Force, they are furnished an RE Code predicated upon the quality of their service and the circumstances of their separation. The evidence of record supports the stated reasons for applicant’s separation and the corresponding RE code assigned in his...