RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-04749

  						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  YES 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His discharge narrative reason for separation, “Marginal Performer Assigned to Initial Training,” be changed to accurately reflect his discharge for physical disability due to an injury received in training.  

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He sustained a shoulder injury during technical training that subsequently disqualified him from a Guaranteed Enlistment Program (GEP) position.  He was inappropriately counseled when provided options to either be reclassified or honorably discharged and not provided the option that upon rehabilitation he was eligible to return to the position to fulfill his military obligation.  His improper discharge prevents him from receiving VA care and rehabilitation and has been left to cover the expense.  

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 22 Jun 82 and enlisted for six years as a Law Enforcement Specialist.  

On 26 Aug 82, the applicant was treated for back pain in the shoulder blade area incurred during a security police exercise.  

On 27 Aug 82, the applicant referred to experiencing trauma to the back six months prior to entering the Air Force.  

On 31 Aug 82, the applicant was referred to mental health for having problems handling challenging situations and on 2 Sep 82, the clinical social worker diagnosed the applicant with avoidant personality disorder and recommended separation.  

On 8 Sep 82, the applicant’s commander initiated discharge actions based on marginal performance and lack of adaptability.  Also on that date, the applicant was seen again for his shoulder pain.

On 13 Sep 82, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the commander’s discharge intent and did not request legal counsel or retention in the Air Force.

On 15 Sep 82, the discharge was found to be legally sufficient.  

On 21 Sep 82, the applicant was furnished an honorable discharge, and was credited with three months of active service.  

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memoranda prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility, which are attached at Exhibits C and D. 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DP2STM-SEP recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice and furthermore, the applicant has not filed a timely petition.  It has been almost 34 years since the applicant’s discharge and he did not provide a valid reason for the delay in timely filing of an application.  Based on the documentation on file in the master of personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority.  Additionally there is no evidence of an error or injustice in the discharge processing.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DP2STM-SEP evaluation is at Exhibit C.

The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice.  Given the co-existence of an injury that required profile restrictions and its intractability to conservative treatment measures, a consideration for a Medical Evaluation Board should have been part of the separation discussion.  However, the disclosure of an injury six months prior to entering active service, with similar physical complaints, led at least one professional to believe the applicant’s medical condition existed prior to service.  Moreover, on 14 Sep 82 the applicant characterized his health as “Excellent” and the examining health care provider found him medically cleared for separation.  Taken collectively, the applicant’s impending administrative discharge and his medical clearance for separation, medical officials found no reason to place the applicant in Medical Hold to conduct a Medical Evaluation Board and a medical discharge; notwithstanding the fact that he was still prescribed pain modulating medications.  Command officials had within their authority to discharge the applicant as a Marginal Performer; but also the option for an Entry Level Separation, with an uncharacterized character of service due to his Avoidant Personality Disorder.

A complete copy of the AFBCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit D.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 10 Jun 16 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E).  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD:

Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice.  After a careful review of the applicant's contentions, documentation submitted in support of the request, and the available evidence of record, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  We also note the applicant did not file the application within three years after the alleged error or injustice was discovered, or should have been discovered, as required by Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552 and Air Force Instruction 36-2603.  While the applicant claims a date of discovery of less than three years prior to receipt of the application, we believe a reasonable date of discovery was more than three years prior to receipt of the application.  Therefore, because we do not find it would be in the interest of justice to recommend granting relief, and the applicant has offered no plausible reason for the delay in filing the application, we cannot conclude it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file the application.  Accordingly, we find the application untimely.

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The application was not timely filed and it would not be in the interest of justice to waive the untimeliness.  It is the decision of the Board, therefore, to reject the application as untimely.

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-04749 in Executive Session on 28 Mar 17 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-04749 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 4 Nov 15, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DP2STM-SEP, dated 6 May 16.
	Exhibit D.  Memorandum, Medical Consultant, dated 10 May 16.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 10 Jun 16.

Pursuant to paragraph 1 of AFI 36-2603 (Title 32 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 865.1), it is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled matter.