RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-04305 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her honorable discharge be changed to a medical discharge. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She was discharged due to a massive asthma attack she had while on active duty. She was told she was being medically discharged due to her asthma. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 17 Feb 81, the applicant commenced her enlistment in the Regular Air Force. On 5 Mar 81, the applicant commander notified her that he was recommending her discharge from the Air Force due to her marginal performance. The applicant’s commander advised her of her rights in this matter and on 5 Mar 81, she acknowledged receipt of the notification for discharge. On 6 Mar 81, the legal office found the case to be legally sufficient and recommended the applicant be furnished an honorable discharge. On 6 Mar 81, the applicant was furnished an honorable discharge, with a narrative reason for separation of marginal performer assigned to recruit or initial training. She was credited with 20 days of active service. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The AFBCMR Medical consultant recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. The applicant’s SF Form 93, Report of Medical History dated 20 Aug 80, noted a prior medical history of asthma (since age 10; no recent episodes) and a history shortness of breath. While there was no other medical documentation regarding asthma in the available records for review, there were several entries from mental health evaluations. The 2 Mar 81 evaluation indicated the applicant was an airman who continued to express bizarre and feelings of losing it. Her mental status was highly tearful, confused with increased anger… She was experiencing feelings of inadequacy, with doom gloom projections and situational adjustment to adult life… On 3 Mar 81, it was noted the applicant’s inability to adapt to training precluded her from achieving the requirements needed to graduate from basic military training (BMT). It was further noted her behavior was bizarre on occasions however, her ability to intelligently communicate indicates that her pranks are well planned. She is unwilling to train. Therefore, it was concluded that she was a marginal performer. There is no medical documentation regarding asthma during the applicant’s very limited military service. In fact, beyond the notation on her SF Form 93, there is no record of asthma. The Medical Consultant concludes that there is no supporting justification for a medical discharge due to an unfitting asthma condition. Furthermore, there is no evidence of a pre-existing condition of such a severity that would have warranted ending her career within than 180 days constituting the basis for an entry- level separation (ELS). In accordance with AFR 39-10, Chapter 3, Paragraph 3-81, Jan 77, marginal airmen selected for separation under this authority should be marginal or sub-marginal producers who possess low potential for advancement. Airmen selected for separation will be discharged not later than the last day of the month following completion of 2 years active duty. Although the applicant completed less than one month of service, the Medical Consultant concludes that her efforts to adapt to the rigors of BMT were accurately assessed as marginal and that no error or injustice occurred in regards to the narrative reason for separation. A complete copy of the AFBCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 23 Apr 15, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). As of this date, no response has been received by this office. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD: After careful consideration of the applicant’s request and the available evidence of record, we find the application untimely. The applicant did not file within three years after the alleged error or injustice was discovered as required by Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552 and Air Force Instruction 36-2603. The applicant has not shown a plausible reason for the delay in filing, and we are not persuaded that the record raises issues of error or injustice which require resolution on the merits. Thus, we cannot conclude it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to file in a timely manner. 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-2014-04305 in Executive Session on 14 Jul 15, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence pertaining AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-04305 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 18 Oct 14, w/atch. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, dated 3 Apr 15. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Apr 15.