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:

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.