AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

IN THE MATTER OF: 

DOCKET NUMBER:  98-01164 
COUNSEL:  NONE 

HEARING DESIRED: 

Applicant requests that his discharge be changed to an honorable 
as well as his discharge code; also that his discharge be changed 
to medical.  Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A. 

The appropriate Air  Force offices evaluated applicant's request 
and  provided  advisory  opinions  to  the  Board  recommending  the 
application be  denied  (Exhibit C ) .  
The advisory opinions were 
forwarded to the applicant for review and response  (Exhibit D). 
As of this date, no response has been received by this office. 
After  careful  consideration  of  applicant's  request  and  the 
available evidence of  record, we  find  insufficient  evidence  of 
error or injustice to warrant  corrective action.  The facts and 
opinions stated in the  advisory opinions appear to be  based  on 
the evidence of record and have not been rebutted by applicant. 
Absent persuasive evidence applicant was denied rights to which 
entitled,  appropriate  regulations  were  not  followed,  or 
appropriate  standards  were  not  applied,  we  find  no  basis  to 
disturb the existing record. 

Accordingly, applicant's request is denied. 

The Board staff is directed to inform applicant of. this decision. 
Applicant should also be informed that this decision is final and 
will only be  reconsidered upon the presentation of new relevant 
evidence  which  was  not  reasonably  available  at  the  time  the 
application was filed. 
Members of the Board Mr. Robert D. Stuart, Mr.  Henry Romo, Jr., 
and  Mr.  Richard  A.  Peterson  considered  this  application  on 
15 October 1998, in accordance with the provisions of Air Force 
Instruction 3 6 - 2 6 0 3   and the governing statute, 10 U.S.C. 1552. 

ROBERT D. STUART 
Panel Chair 

Exhibits: 
A.  Applicant's DD Form 149 
B.  Available Master Eersonnel Records 
C.  Advisory Opinion 
D.  AFBCMR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinions 

F 

3 June 1998 
98-01 164 

MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR 

FROM:  BCMR Medical Consultant  ' 

1535 Command Drive, EE Wing, 3rd Floor 
Andrews AFB MD  20762-7002 

SU B J ECT: 

ion 

This request is not filed in a timely manner as nearly 13 years have passed since his discharge. 

Applicant's entire case file has been reviewed and is forwarded with the following findings, 

conclusions and recommendations. 

REQUESTED ACTION:  The applicant was administratively discharged under the provisions of 

AFR 39-10 with a General Discharge for Minor Disciplinary Infractions on 14 August 1985 after 1 year, 
9 months, and 17 days on active duty.  He now applies requesting the records be changed to show a 
medical discharge under honorable conditions. 

FACTS:  The applicant states that his discharge would not have occurred had it not been for a 
report filed  by a psychologist who evaluated him by direction of his commander.  The evaluation, 
performed in May 1985, did not disclose any psychiatric diagnosis that would have warranted 
consideration in the disability evaluation system, finding only that the applicant was experiencing an 
occupational problem and that he had personality traits that rendered him unsuitable (not unfit) for 
continued military duty.  Evidence of record and medical examinations prior to separation indicate the 
applicant was fit and medically qualified for continued military service or appropriate separation and did 
not have any physical or mental condition which would have warranted consideration under the 
provisions of AFM 354.  Reasons for discharge and discharge proceedings are well documented in the 
records.  Action and disposition in this case are proper and reflect compliance with Air Force directives 
which implement the law. 

The applicant had a separation physical exam on 26 July 1985 that found him qualified for 

worldwide duty. 

DISCUSSION:  A thorough review of available records shows that the applicant received numerous 

rehabilitative attempts to correct his behavior as evidenced by administrative actions.  When he failed 
to respond to these attempts, a mental health evaluation was directed which showed the above 
mentioned findings.  The applicant is correct in stating that this report was used in his discharge 
process, as is usual in such cases.  It was not, however, the basis for his discharge which clearly was 
initiated because of his many disciplinary infractions.  There wgs no defect that should have been 
found unfitting and, therefore, the applicant's request for correhion of his records to show an honorable 

' ;' 

Page 2 

AFBCMR Case #98-01164 

medical discharge is not supported by evidence of records.  Evidence of record establishes beyond all 
reasonable doubt that the applicant was medically qualified for continued active duty, that the reason 
for his separation was proper, and that no error or injustice occurred in this case. 

RECOMMENDATION: The Medical Consultant for the BCMR recommends that the application be 

denied. 

FREDERICK W. HORNICK, Col., USAF, MC, FS 
Chief Medical Consultant, AFBCMR 
Medical Advisor SAF Personnel Council 

D E P A R T M E N T  OF T H E  A I R   FORCE 

HEADQUARTERS  AIR  FORCE  P E R S O N N E L  CENTER 

R A N D O L P H  AIR  FORCE B A S E  TEXAS 

MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR 

FROM:  HQ AFPCDPPRS 

550 C Street West Ste 11 
Randolph AFB TX  78150-4713 

The applicant, while serving in the grade of airman, was discharged from the Air Force 14 Aug 

85 under the provisions of AFR 39-10 (Ivbsconduct-Pattern of Minor Disciplinary Infractions) 
with an under honorable conditions (General) discharge.  He served 01 year 09 months and 17 
days total active service. 

Requested Action.  The applicant is requesting his discharge be changed to honorable as well as 

his discharge code; would also like his discharge be changed to medical. 

Basis for Request.  Applicant states he believes if it wouldn’t been for his psychological testing 
he would still be in the military.  He had serious problems with his squadron commander with no 
one to talk to.  The advisory fiom the AFBCMR Medical Consultant, 03 Jun 98, provides 
information concerning applicant’s medical condition at the time of his discharge.  This advisory 
will address only the discharge processing in the case. 

Facts.  On 15 Jul85, applicant was notified by his commander that involuntary discharge action 

had been initiated against him for minor disciplinary infractions.  The commander indicated his 
reasons for his action were that during the period  10 May 84 through 07 Jun 84 applicant had 
three (3) Letters of Reprimand for infractions such as; failure to maintain dormatory room 
standards, conduct unbecoming a Security Policeman, sleeping on post and writing bad checks. 
He also, was not recommended for promotion and was given a Letter of Counseling for a traffic 
violation.  In addition, he was enrolled in the alcohol rehabi 
As a result of 
incident.  Finally, he was evaluated by a staff psychologist a 
that evaluation, it was recommended that he administratively discharged fiom the Air Force and 
that the applicant did not have any physical or mental condition which would warrant 
consideration for processing under the disability directives.  The applicant was advised that he had 
a right to consult legal counsel.  Applicant consulted counsel and submitted a statement in his own 
behalf indicating his desire to remain in the service.  He fbrther indicated that if there was no 
possible way to avoid his discharge, he requested an honorable discharge in order to given a 
fighting change with the civilian populace.  The case was reviewed by the base legal office and 
was found to be legally sufficient to support discharge.  The discharge authority reviewed the case 
on 12 Aug 85 and directed the applicant be discharged for minor disciplinary infraction and be 
given a general discharge. 

* 

Discussion.  This case has been reviewed for separation processing and there are no errors or 

irregularities causing an injustice to the applicant.  The discharge complies with directives in effect 
at the time of his discharge.  The records indicate member’s military service was reviewed and 
appropriate action was taken. 

Recommendation. Applicant did not identify any specific errors in the discharge processing nor 

provide facts which warrant an upgrade of the discharge he received, change his discharge code 
or reason for discharge.  Accordingly, we recommend applicant’s request be denied.  He has not 
filed a timely request. 

JOHN C. WOOTEN, DAF 
Military Personnel Mgmt Spec 
Separations Branch 
Dir of Personnel Program Management