RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01832 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect: 1. His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable discharge or his type of separation be changed to “medical.” 2. His narrative reason for separation of misconduct be changed. 3. His reentry (RE) code of 2B (Separated with a general or under-other-than-honorable-conditions (UOTHC) discharge) be changed. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: During the time of his separation, he was undergoing medical health treatment and was not allowed to complete the treatment. He felt harassed and discriminated against. His symptoms, due to the medication “Accutane” were not taken into consideration when his commander vacated his Article 15 punishment and initiated his discharge. He experienced multiple side effects, to include depression, while on Accutane. The depression continued for several years after he stopped taking the medication. He began mental health treatment on 5 Mar 05. He was accused of being absent without leave (AWOL) during an exercise; however, the incident was dismissed by his commander. He was informed he could be discharged due to his lack of progression in training. He was accused of an infraction he did not commit and threatened with a court-martial. He pled guilty and accepted an Article 15 so that he could move on with his career. In Mar 05, he felt hopeless and suicidal. His chain of command made it impossible for him to continue his medical treatments due to his work schedule. His claim is based on the fact he was discriminated against for no reason. He feels his discharge was unjust and too harsh. The misconduct reference hinders his ability to acquire future federal employment. Since his discharge, he has completed an Associate’s degree and is working on his Bachelor’s degree. He would like to receive the GI Bill benefits that he contributed into but due to his discharge is unable to use. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 17 Sep 02, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force. On 6 Jul 05, his commander notified him that he was recommending his separation from the Air Force under the provisions of AFPD 36-32, Military Retirements and Separations and AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airman, for Misconduct: A Pattern of Misconduct, Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order and Discipline. The specific reasons for the action were: Between 19 Aug 03 and 18 May 05, the applicant received two (2) letters of counseling (LOC); four (4) letters of reprimand (LOR) and two (2) Article 15s for various infractions (for a detailed review of the applicant’s infractions, see the Notification Memorandum, dated 6 Jul 05, included in Exhibit B). The applicant acknowledged receipt of the discharge notification and waived his right to submit a statement in his own behalf. A review of the discharge case file by the Staff Judge Advocate was found legally sufficient. On 19 Jul 05, the discharge authority approved the recommended discharge. On 20 Jul 05, the applicant was issued a general (under honorable conditions) discharge for misconduct. He served 2 years, 10 months and 4 days on active duty. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Advisor recommends denial since the applicant has not meet the burden to support his petition for a medical discharge due to the use of Accutane or any existing mental health condition present at the time of separation. Accutane was prescribed for the applicant’s skin condition in Apr 05 and continued on for a twenty-week cycle of therapy. His records indicate he experienced a good response to the medication with minimal side effects. Progress notes throughout the course of treatment indicate the absence of any mental health effects from the medication and documented negative entries for any depression, joint aches or abdominal pain. One twenty-week cycle of therapy was prescribed and the medication was very well tolerated throughout the treatment period which concluded in Oct 05. On or around 24 Feb 05, prior to starting Accutane, the applicant participated in an initial intake appointment in the Life Skills Support Center (LSSC). During the process, the psychologist documented the applicant’s comments that he wanted “to get out of the military” and had been referred for occupational problems. His intake assessment indicated an Axis I diagnosis of occupational problems and no medication was ever prescribed during his interaction with the LSSC. He was recommended for group and individual counseling sessions. There is no record of additional life skills therapy after Mar 05. The applicant remained world-wide qualified throughout the course of therapy and no profiles or duty restrictions were issued by the mental health provider. His Enlisted Performance Reports (EPRs) during the period 17 Sep 02 through 16 May 04 indicate satisfactory performance for accomplishment of assigned duties, compliance with military bearing standards and on/off duty contact. However, his EPR for the period 17 May 04 through 22 Nov 04 indicates a significant decline in overall performance rating by his rater and squadron commander. Deficiencies were documented in conduct on/off duty, compliance with training requirements and inefficient performance of assigned duties. The Medical Advisor notes the governing instruction used in the applicant’s discharge, includes conduct of a nature that tends to disrupt order, discipline or morale within the military community. The type of misconduct usually involves causing dissent, disruption and degradation of mission effectiveness. The Medical Advisor opines that the applicant clearly demonstrated the pattern of behavior which justified administrative separation not due to any medical treatment or mental health diagnosis. The complete BCMR Medical Advisor’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 14 Dec 12, for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, this office has received no response (Exhibit D). _________________________________________________________________ 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 to warrant an upgrade to honorable, or to change to his narrative reason for separation or reentry code. Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and within the commander's discretionary authority. The applicant has provided no evidence which would lead us to believe the characterization of the service was contrary to the provisions of the governing regulation, unduly harsh, or disproportionate to the offenses committed. Regarding his request to change his type of separation to medical, after a thorough review of the evidence of record and careful consideration of the applicant's contentions, we are not persuaded that he has been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the BCMR Medical Advisor and adopt his rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, 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 this application in Executive Session on 20 Feb 13, under the provisions of AFI 36- 2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC- 2012-01832: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 9 Apr 12, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, BCMR Medical Advisor, dated 13 Dec 12. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Dec 12. Panel Chair