Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00717
Original file (BC-2005-00717.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-00717


      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  NONE

      XXXXXXX    HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  3 SEP 06


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His narrative reason for his separation be changed from  voluntary  to
hardship.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

In late November 1991, it became imminently clear that he would not be
able to remain on  active  duty  due  to  financial  reasons;  plainly
stated, he had more in monthly expenses than he was receiving  in  pay
as an airman.  He would be able to rectify the situation by  returning
to the workforce as a civilian. As a result of this, he was instructed
to apply for a discharge, voluntary and hardship, which  he  did.  The
day he was to find out the  status  of  his  hardship  discharge,  the
voluntary separation - honorable was  approved;  unlikely  timing  but
that is how it happened.  He would like to state that had he known  he
would be ineligible for a Veteran’s loan as a result of accepting  the
voluntary and not the hardship he would have definitely waited for the
hardship to go through.  He joined the Air Force  in  full  faith  and
support of his government to serve in a time of conflict. He asks  now
that his government returns the favor and grants his request.

In support of his appeal he provided a personal letter and a  copy  of
DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty.

Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 2 October 1991  for
a period of four years.

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.  The application was  submitted  under  the
provisions of  AFR  39-10,  para  3-15  (miscellaneous  reasons).  The
applicant’s reason for submitting the application for  separation  was
“I wish to separate so that I may attend college on a full-time  basis
so that I may attain my B.A. 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. The applicant had a total of 1 year, 2 months and
5 days of total active military service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS  recommended  denial  and   stated   that   there   is   no
documentation on file  in  the  master  personnel  records  indicating
applicant ever applied for separation for hardship reasons.

Based on the documentation on file in the  master  personnel  records,
the discharge was  consistent  with  the  procedural  and  substantive
requirements of the discharge regulation. The discharge was within the
discretion of the discharge authority.

Applicant did not submit  any  evidence  or  identify  any  errors  or
injustices that occurred in the discharge processing. He  provided  no
facts warranting a change to the narrative reason for separation.

AFPC/DPPRS complete 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
18 March 2005 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date,
there has been no response 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 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.  After a thorough review  of  the
evidence of record and applicant's submission,  we  do  not  find  his
uncorroborated  assertions,  in  and   by   themselves,   sufficiently
persuasive to override the rationale provided by the  Air  Force.   In
this respect, we note that the applicant requested an early separation
from the Air Force to attend college.  Therefore, we  agree  with  the
opinions and  recommendation  of  the  Air  Force  office  of  primary
responsibility and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for  our
decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of having
suffered either an error or injustice. Applicant has not provided  any
documentation pertaining to his  alleged  hardship  that  occurred  on
active duty. Therefore, in the absence of persuasive evidence  to  the
contrary, we find 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2005-00717 in Executive Session on 4 May 2005, under the provisions of
AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. John B. Hennessey, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Joseph D. Yount, Member
                 Mr. Albert C. Ellett, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 22 Feb 05, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 15 Mar 05.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Mar 05.



                                   JOHN B. HENNESSEY
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03295

    Original file (BC-2005-03295.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-03295 INDEX NUMBER: 110.03 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 30 FEBRUARY 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The narrative reason for separation, trial by court-martial, be changed. The narrative reason for separation and Separation Program Designator (SPD) indicates...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02948

    Original file (BC-2005-02948.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Please consider the time he has spent in the U.S. Army after he was discharged from the U.S. Air Force; it was eight years or more. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied and states based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. Applicant did not submit any evidence...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-00717

    Original file (BC-2009-00717.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS The OPR notes the evidence in the applicant’s military records is insufficient to determine the exact facts and circumstances surrounding her discharge. The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2009-00717 in Executive Session on 23 Sep 09, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02495

    Original file (BC-2005-02495.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-02495 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 13 FEB 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Narrative Reason for Separation be changed from “Miscellaneous/General Reasons” to “Reduction in...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00993

    Original file (BC-2007-00993.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00993 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 1 OCT 2008 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Separation Program Designator (SPD) code be changed; however, it appears that his request is to have his reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 3D (second term or...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02405

    Original file (BC-2006-02405.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant did not submit evidence or identify any errors or injustices and the narrative reason for separation is correct. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 28 November 2006 under the provisions of AFI 36- 2603: Ms. Cathlynn B. Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 25 Aug 06.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00089

    Original file (BC-2005-00089.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 15 December 2004, he was separated under the provisions of the Air Force Shaping Program, Phase II, AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen (miscellaneous/general reasons) from the Air Force with an honorable discharge. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his reason for separation should be changed. We therefore agree with the recommendation of the Air Force and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00335

    Original file (BC-2005-00335.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The administrative discharge board recommended that applicant be discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge without probation and rehabilitation. The discharge authority approved the separation and directed the applicant be discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge without probation and rehabilitation. Applicant reviewed the FBI report and stated that he was in his house at the time of the alleged incident in question.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02254

    Original file (BC-2005-02254.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 2 January 1992, applicant’s commander notified him that he was recommending he be discharged from the Air Force for misconduct-civil conviction. On 6 January 1992, the applicant was discharged in the grade of airman under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Misconduct-Civil Conviction and received a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. On 9 April 1996, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (DRB) denied his application and concluded the discharge was consistent with the procedural and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01278

    Original file (BC-2005-01278.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He began to look for means to support his addiction for which he was convicted. Civilian court conviction consisted of confinement from 21 Feb 56 – 17 Mar 56 (36 days). On 10 Sep 69, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied applicant’s request to have his discharge upgraded and for a waiver to permit reenlistment.