RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:			DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-00290
INDEX CODE:  110.02 
	XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX		COUNSEL: NONE

							HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  4 August 2007

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

Her narrative reason for separation be changed to medical versus unsatisfactory performance.  

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She performed in an outstanding manner during her eight years of service until a physically disabling condition, accompanied with severe pain, affected her career and quality of life.  The medical community failed to diagnose her condition, causing her to become dependent on pain medications and making her unable to concentrate or focus on her career tasks.  She failed two of her 7-skill level exams because she was suffering from severe pain during one exam and under the influence of the pain medications during the other exam.  

In support of her application, the applicant provides copies of her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty; Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) rating decision; and a civilian doctor’s letter of evaluation.  The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 4 March 1994, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force at the age of 23 in the grade of airman (E-2) for a period of four years.  She was progressively promoted to the grade of staff sergeant (E-5) effective and with a date of rank of 1 December 2000.  

On 5 March 2002, the applicant failed her 7-level Career Development Course (CDC) end-of-course examination.  On 21 May 2002, the applicant failed her 7-level Career Development Course (CDC) end-of-course examination for the second time.  On 25 June 2002, the applicant was notified by her commander of the intent to recommend her for discharge for unsatisfactory performance.  The applicant was advised of her rights to consult counsel and to submit a statement in her own behalf.  On 9 July 2002, the applicant waived her right to an administrative discharge board with a conditional waiver for no less than an honorable discharge if the recommendation for her discharge was approved.  In a legal review of the discharge case file, the staff judge advocate found the file legally sufficient and recommended the applicant be separated from the service with an honorable discharge without probation or rehabilitation (P&R).  On 5 August 2002, the discharge authority directed the applicant be discharged under the provisions of Air Force Instruction 36-3208, paragraph 5.26.3, with an honorable discharge without P&R.  

On 5 August 2002, the applicant was discharged with an honorable discharge with a narrative reason for separation of unsatisfactory performance.  She served eight years, six months and five days on active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 12 May 2006, the applicant was notified that attempts to obtain her service medical records from the Department of Veteran’s Affairs were unsuccessful; therefore, without her service medical records, her application would not be able to be fully evaluated by the Air Force Office of Primary Responsibility.  

SAF/MRBR requested a response from the applicant within 30 days in reference to obtaining her service medical records; however, as of this date this office has not received a response.  Therefore, no Air Force Advisory evaluation has been provided.

The SAF/MRBR letter is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

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.  Based upon the presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs and without evidence to the contrary, we must assume that the applicant's discharge, and specifically her narrative reason for separation, was proper and in compliance with appropriate directives.  Therefore, based on the available evidence of record, we find no basis upon which to favorably consider 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 28 June 2006, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2006-00290:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 16 Feb 06, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 24 Aug 05.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 2 Sep 05.