Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03020
Original file (BC 2013 03020.txt) Auto-classification: Approved
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-03020
		
		COUNSEL:  NONE
 
		HEARING DESIRED:  NO


________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His narrative reason for separation, as reflected in Block 28 of 
his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active 
Duty, be changed from “Unsatisfactory Performance” to 
“Hardship.”

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

It has been 20 years since his discharge.  At the time of his 
discharge, he was working through a hardship dealing with the 
death of his father which occurred on 21 Jun 93.  He was 
informed by his first sergeant at that time that if he was 
separated, he could be discharged for hardship and maintain all 
veterans’ benefits with the exception of the Montgomery GI Bill.  
Today, he and his family are homeless after selling a home and 
his current narrative reason for separation listed on his DD 214 
precludes him from being eligible for a Department of Veterans 
Affairs (DVA) home loan.

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant’s military personnel records indicate he commenced 
his service in the Regular Air Force on 9 Dec 91.

On 9 Jun 93, the applicant was notified by his commander of his 
intent to recommend his discharge for Unsatisfactory 
Performance—failure to progress in on-the-job training, and for 
Misconduct—Minor Disciplinary Infractions, under the provisions 
of AFR 39-10, Administrative Separation of Airmen.  The reasons 
for the action included twice failing his end of course 
examination, which resulted in his upgrade training being 
terminated, and for continued misconduct which included a 
traffic ticket and incidences of failure to report for duty on 
time and failure to attend mandatory appointments, for which he 
received verbal and written counseling.  

On 10 Jun 93, after consulting with legal counsel, the applicant 
elected to submit statements on his behalf.

On 3 Aug 93, the case was found to be legally sufficient and the 
discharge authority approved the commander’s recommendation the 
same day, directing the applicant’s administrative discharge 
without probation and rehabilitation.

On 12 Aug 93, the applicant was furnished a General (Under 
Honorable Conditions) discharge for Unsatisfactory Performance 
and was credited with one year, eight months, and four days of 
total active service.

A request for post-service information was forwarded to the 
applicant on 25 Feb 14 for review and comment within 30 days.  
As of this date, no response has been 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.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of an injustice.  We find no 
impropriety in the characterization of the applicant's discharge 
or the narrative reason for his separation.  Considered alone, 
we conclude the discharge proceedings were proper and 
characterization of the discharge and narrative reason for 
separation was appropriate to the existing circumstances.  
Consideration of this Board, however, is not limited to the 
events which precipitated the discharge.  In this respect, it 
may base its decision on matters of equity and clemency rather 
than simply on whether rules and regulations which existed at 
the time were followed.  Under this broader mandate, and after 
careful consideration of all the facts and circumstances of 
applicant's case, we are persuaded that it would be in the 
interest of justice to recommend some form of relief.  While it 
appears the narrative reason for separation was appropriate to 
the circumstances, in view of the passage of time, we believe 
the continued stigma of the narrative reason for separation of 
“unsatisfactory performance” is unduly harsh and no longer 
serves any useful purpose.  Therefore, we recommend correcting 
the applicant’s records to reflect the narrative reason for 
separation was “Secretarial Authority.”  While this is not the 
relief the applicant seeks, in our view it is proper and 
fitting.  Therefore, we recommend correcting the applicant’s 
records to the extent indicated below.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air 
Force relating to the JASON N. V. WULF be corrected to show that 
his narrative reason for separation, issued in conjunction with 
his 12 August 1993 General (Under Honorable Conditions) 
discharge, was “Secretarial Authority,” instead of 
“Unsatisfactory Performance.”

________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket 
Number 2013-03020 in Executive Session on 20 May 14, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Ms.  , Panel Chair
	Mr.  , Member
	Mr.  , Member

All members voted to correct the records as recommended.  The 
following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 14 June 13, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 25 Feb 14, w/atch.

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02308

    Original file (BC-2004-02308.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 7 Jun 94, she elected to accept separation from the Air Force in lieu of a waiver of discharge processing. They recommended against changing the RE code as there is no error in the applicant’s records. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. HQ AFPC/DPPAT advises that DOD records indicate the applicant accepted MGIB enrollment on 12 Mar 93.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03431

    Original file (BC-2002-03431.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A Report of Individual Counseling dated 6 Nov 87 indicated the applicant had been advised he was being considered for discharge for failure to progress in the WMP. On 8 Feb 88, he was notified of his commander’s intent to recommend discharge for failure to progress in the WMP. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPRS provide their rationale for recommend denial.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-00882

    Original file (BC-2002-00882.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-00882 INDEX CODE: 126.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Article 15 be set aside so that her discharge can be upgraded so that she may qualify for Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) benefits. The service member may then consult with a defense counsel to determine whether to accept nonjudicial...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03333

    Original file (BC-2004-03333.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant was called to ADT on 19 Apr 62, and was released from ADT on 16 Oct 62. In a 14 May 64 letter, the 90ATS reported the applicant failed to complete his ADT, serving only 32 days. On 16 Feb 65, the applicant was relieved from the Reserves and discharged under honorable conditions (general), effective 16 Feb 65.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 9900538

    Original file (9900538.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    After notification, the applicant provided a statement explaining his problems with the AMWAY solicitation and his weight. The Chief recommended applicant’s retirement as a 1LT. AC-XXXXXX, dated 29 Jan 96, directed that, effective 29 Feb 96, the applicant would be relieved from active duty and retired effective 1 Mar 96 in the grade of captain.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02437

    Original file (BC 2014 02437.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02437 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The narrative reason for separation on her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be changed to “Pregnancy Hardship” or “Hardship.” APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: When she was discharged she was told her discharge was for pregnancy/hardship, but her DD Form 214 only states “pregnancy.” The...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00690

    Original file (BC 2014 00690.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00690 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be changed to reflect “Hardship” as the narrative reason for separation. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03020

    Original file (BC 2014 03020.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03020 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect his foreign service in Germany (Will be administratively corrected) Okinawa, Japan and several other countries. They were able to verify the applicant served four months in Germany and recommend he be credited with boots on the ground in Germany but were unable to verify any...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00066

    Original file (BC-2005-00066.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His security forces commander assured him that he would have educational benefits under the (MGIB). They provided no recommendation. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D).

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00722

    Original file (BC-2006-00722.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 22 Mar 04, applicant applied to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) requesting his discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. The Board further concluded that there exists no legal or equitable basis for upgrade of the discharge. Exhibit B.