RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-03284 COUNSEL: NO HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His honorable discharge be changed to an honorable hardship discharge. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was 20 years old and did not understand how his separation would impact his Department of Veteran Affairs (DVA) benefits. At the time of his discharge request, he provided a detailed letter outlining his family hardship. His mother was admitted to a state hospital and diagnosed with Schizophrenia and a Personality Disorder. She was divorced and homeless with two children under the age of 10 with no means of support. While deployed, his mother’s mental, financial and residential situations rapidly deteriorated; she was unable to hold down a job; was evicted numerous times; and was subject to fits of rage and outbursts. He sought separation from the Air Force to provide stability and security for his mother and two school-aged sisters. His commander suggested he apply for an early out. Based on his advice he applied for an early separation; wrote a letter detailing his circumstances, and was separated on 19 Jun 92. He never questioned how the “coding” of his separation would affect his DVA benefits. He is a father and husband looking to secure a home for his own family. His service which was honorable and during a time of National Defense, entitles him to a DVA home loan; however, the processing error on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty makes him ineligible. In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a personal statement and copies of his mother’s medical records. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 12 Dec 90, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force. In letters dated, 9 Apr 92, the applicant submitted a request for voluntary separation for miscellaneous reasons with an effective date of 15 Jun 92. The applicant cited the lack of advancement, the uncertain future of his Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC), 20731 (APR Morse Systems Operator) and his personal and professional encounters with Air Force policies left him with no desire to remain a part of the Air Force He stated it would be in his best interest to pursue other avenues. On 18 Apr 92, the applicant’s supervisor initiated an AF Form 418, Selective Reenlistment/Noncommissioned Officer (NCO) Status Consideration, recommending he be non-selected for reenlistment. The supervisor indicated the applicant had not performed his assigned duties in a manner commensurate with his rank, skill level, and training time provided. Specifically, the applicant falsified an evaluation and knowingly passed invalid evaluation results up the chain of command to include his squadron commander. On 21 Apr 92, the commander concurred with the applicant’s request for early separation and noted the separation was in the best interest of the Air Force. On 22 Apr 92, the applicant’s commander concurred with the supervisor’s recommendation and non-selected the applicant for reenlistment. The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of non-selection for reenlistment and of his right to appeal the commander’s decision. On 4 Jun 92, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intent to non-recommend him for promotion to the grade of airman first class. The specific reason for this action was the applicant cheated on a formal proficiency examination. For this misconduct, he received a Letter of Reprimand. The applicant acknowledged receipt of the non-recommendation for promotion. On 19 Jun 92, the applicant was discharged in the grade of airman with a narrative reason for separation of Voluntary – Miscellaneous Reasons. He served one year, six months and eight days of active duty service. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial. The applicant did not provide any evidence of an error or injustice to warrant the requested change to his reason for separation. His discharge was correctly administered based upon his Reentry (RE) code of 2X. DPSOR was unable to confirm what the commander’s intentions were regarding the applicant’s non-selection for reenlistment, however, the fact remains he submitted a voluntary miscellaneous separation request and was given a RE Code of 2X. After reviewing the applicant’s reason for separation at no time did he mention anything regarding his mother’s medical condition. Based on the documentation on file in the applicant’s personnel records, the discharge to include his reason for separation was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge manual and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states there are two issues regarding his request for a change of discharge. First, the description for a hardship discharge states “in order to qualify for separation under this provision, the hardship must not be of a temporary nature; must have developed or become increasingly worse since entry on active duty; discharge or release from active duty is the only readily available means of alleviation; and the individual must have made reasonable effort to relieve the conditions through other means available and appropriate to the family circumstances.” He qualifies for a “hardship” discharge, has supplied medical documentation that his mother’s mental illness was genuine and provided letters from his family that support his assertions. The second issue involves why was his honorable discharge characterized as “Voluntary-Miscellaneous Reasons” and given a RE code of 2X. He discussed his family concerns and sought advice from his commanding officer. Their conversations were personal and off the record due to his participation on the Air Force/United Kingdom Ice Hockey team. During one of their conversations, as things were becoming increasingly dire at home and his concerns for his family began to physically and mentally take a toll on him, his commander informed him that a hardship discharge was a long and arduous process and required a lot of paperwork. His commander suggested a quicker alternative would be to file for a voluntary discharge because it would be a faster way for him to get stateside. Also, because of the military draw downs (completion of Operations DESERT SHIELD/DESERT STORM) his AFSC 20731 was becoming an obsolete technology and he would fare better going that route as he did not have access to his mother’s mental health/medical records. He trusted his commander’s advice based on his rank and his influence as a mentor. At the time of his separation, he believed he was not eligible for reenlistment due to the surplus of 20731’s. His AFSC was specific and antiquated and retraining would be a definite requirement but at a greater cost to the Air Force. He was never informed he was not eligible based on his performance in rank, only there was no need for his skills in the Air Force Reserves or the Air Force moving forward. He was a young airman with enormous emotional and personal burdens at home, sought out and took the advice of an authority figure, and trusted the process and the statements of those responsible for his separation from the military. In further support of his request, the applicant provides copies of letters of support. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ 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. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we find no evidence of an error or injustice that occurred in the discharge processing. While the applicant’s response to the Air Force evaluation is noted, we do not find his assertions, in and by themselves, sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air Force Office of Primary Responsibility (OPR). Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force OPR and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. In view of the above and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no 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-2013-03284 in Executive Session on 6 May 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member Although chaired the panel, in view of her unavailability, has signed as Acting Panel Chair. The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 15 Jun 13, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Available Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 13 Sep 13. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Oct 13. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 18 Nov 13, w/atchs. 1 2