RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-02051
                                       INDEX CODE:  128.00

      XXXXXXXXXXXXXX                    COUNSEL: NONE

      XXXXXXXXXX                        HEARING DESIRED:  NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He was wrongfully discharged from the Air Force and is entitled to 31  years
of back pay.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He had full intentions of retiring from the United States Air Force.  If  he
was found disqualified for the job that he signed  up  for,  he  would  have
chosen another career field.  He requested K-9 Handling; however,  he  never
heard anything and was discharged a few days later.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a  personal  statement  and
copies  of  his   discharge   documentation.    The   applicant’s   complete
submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 27 September 1973, the applicant enlisted in the  Regular  Air  Force  at
the age of 24 in the grade of airman basic for a period of  six  years.   He
enlisted under  the  guaranteed  job  program  (Project  Guarantee)  for  an
assignment in the Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) 46230,  Aircraft  Armament
Specialist.   The  applicant  signed   a   statement   in   his   enlistment
documentation stating, “The Air Force guarantees my  initial  classification
and assignment in AF Specialty Code (AFSC) 46230.   I  have  been  counseled
concerning it and understand  that  this  AFSC  requires  special  screening
and/or testing,  which  will  be  accomplished  after  arrival  at  Lackland
Military Training Center.  If I should  be  disqualified  for  training  for
this AFSC, I may elect in writing to complete my enlistment in another  AFSC
for which  I  am  qualified  or  be  immediately  discharged.   If  I  elect
discharge, I understand I may be liable for  induction  under  the  Military
Service Act.”

A Color Vision Threshold Tester in the applicant’s military medical  records
indicates the applicant failed the color vision test with a score of  36/64.
 An AF Form 422, Physical Profile Serial  Report,  dated  23  October  1973,
restricted the applicant from any job requiring normal color vision.  On  26
October 1973, the applicant was found unqualified  for  assignment  in  AFSC
46230 due to his inability to satisfy requirements  of  AFMs  35-98,  35-99,
and 39-1 (color vision).  The applicant signed a statement requesting he  be
separated from the Air Force under the provisions of AFM 39-10, paragraph 3-
8m and USAFMPC/DPMMA Letter, dated 23 June 1971,  Guaranteed  AFSC  Program.
Under subparagraph 2e, of the statement, the applicant indicated he did  not
desire another AFSC.  On 26 October 1973,  his  request  for  discharge  was
approved and it was directed he be at the earliest possible date.

The applicant was honorably discharged effective 2 November  1973.   He  had
served one month and six days on active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  DPPRS states the  applicant’s  discharge  was
consistent  with  the  procedural  and  substantive  requirements   of   the
discharge regulation in affect at that time and was  within  the  discretion
of the discharge authority.  The applicant did not submit  any  evidence  or
identify  any  errors  or  injustices  that  occurred   in   his   discharge
processing.  The applicant submitted a request for discharge  and  indicated
he did not desire to serve his enlistment in another AFSC.  His request  was
approved and he was discharge effective  2  November  1973.   It  is  DPPRS’
opinion  that  the  applicant  has  provided  no  facts  indicating  he  was
wrongfully discharged.  The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant rebuts that he was never offered his choice  of  another  job,
like he was promised.  He tried  to  get  into  K-9  Handling;  however,  he
assumes it was disapproved because he never heard anything  further  on  it.
All he has is his word.  He must have signed something he was not  aware  of
because he signed a lot of paperwork where he was told to  sign  during  his
out-processing

___________________________________________________________________

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 probable error or injustice.  The  applicant  did  not  provide
persuasive evidence showing  the  information  in  the  discharge  case  was
erroneous, his substantial rights were  violated,  or  that  his  commanders
abused their discretionary authority.  The evidence of record indicates  the
applicant was disqualified for  assignment  in  his  guaranteed  AFSC  after
failing a color vision test.  The applicant voluntarily signed  a  statement
on 26 October 1973 stating he did not desire to be assigned to another  AFSC
and requested separation from the Air Force.  In view  of  this,  the  Board
agrees with the opinion and recommendation  of  the  Air  Force  and  adopts
their rationale as the basis for their conclusion  that  the  applicant  has
not been the victim of an error or injustice.  Therefore,  the  Board  finds
no compelling  basis  to  recommend  granting  the  relief  sought  in  this
application.

_________________________________________________________________

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 this application in  Executive
Session on 15 September 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

            Mr. Laurence M. Groner, Panel Chair
            Ms. Jean A. Reynolds, Member
            Ms. Carolyn B. Willis, Member


The following documentary evidence for AFBCMR Docket Number
BC-2004-02051 was considered:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 11 Jun 04.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 12 Jul 04.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 16 Jul 04.




                                  LAURENCE M. GRONER
                                                   Panel Chair