RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-02845
INDEX CODE: 110.02
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, Item
28, Narrative Reason for Separation, be corrected to read “Service
Connected Condition.”
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His DD Form 214, Item 28, reads “Character and Behavior Disorder” which is
incorrect. He is rated 50 percent service connected and his record should
be corrected accordingly.
In support of his request, applicant submits a copy of the Veterans
Administration (VA) letter establishing his receipt of disability
compensation for a service-connected disability rated at 30 percent or
more.
The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 20 February 1985.
On 9 December 1985, in accordance with AFR 39-10, Chapter 5, paragraph
5.11i, Conditions that Interfere with Military Service, the commander
initiated discharge proceedings against the applicant. The applicant was
advised of his rights in this matter. After consulting military legal
counsel, the applicant waived his right to submit statements in his behalf.
In a legal review of the discharge case file, the staff judge advocate
found it legally sufficient and recommended that the applicant be
discharged from the Air Force with an honorable discharge. On 19 December
1985, the discharge authority directed that the applicant be discharged
from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Chapter 5, Paragraph
5.11i, Conditions that Interfere with Military Service, with a type of
discharge as honorable. The applicant was discharged on 20 December 1985
by reason of “Conditions that Interfere with Military Service not
Disability-Character and Behavior Disorder” with a Separation Code of “JFX”
and a Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of “2C.” He served 10 months and
1 day on active duty.
Information provided by the DVA indicates that the applicant is currently
rated for service-connected disability at 40 percent for back strain and 10
percent for tinnitus. The VA did not rate his impaired hearing or limited
motion in cervical spine as service connected.
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from
the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letters prepared by
the appropriate offices of the Air Force at Exhibit C, D and E.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends the application be denied. The BCMR
Medical Consultant states that there is no evidence to suggest that Air
Force psychiatrists made the wrong diagnosis. Therefore, the narrative
reason for discharge is correct.
The BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C.
AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied. DPPRS states the
discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements
of the discharge regulation. DPPRS states that the applicant has not
provided any facts warranting a change of his discharge.
The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D.
AFPC/DPPD recommends the application be denied. DPPD states that a review
of the applicant’s administrative discharge does include a medical
evaluation in which he was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder with mixed
emotional features by dysphoric mood, decreased appetite, insomnia,
decreased concentration, and decreased interest in activities. DPPD
further states that since an adjustment disorder is considered unsuiting
rather than unfitting, it is not compensable or ratable under military
disability laws and policy. The DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit E.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 31
May 2002 for review and response. As of this date, this office has
received no response.
_________________________________________________________________
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 agree
with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force offices of primary
responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion
that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.
Therefore, 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 25 July 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
Mr. Billy C. Baxter, Member
Ms. Carolyn B. Willis, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 125 September 2001, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated
11 April 2002.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 21 May 2002.
Exhibit E. Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 14 May 2002.
Exhibit F. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 31 May 2002.
RICHARD A. PETERSON
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03053
The AFBCMR Medical Consultant states that the evidence of record indicates that the applicant’s back pain, neck pain, stuttering and wrist pain did not warrant referral into the Air Force Disability Evaluation System. The HQ AFPC/DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to applicant on 4 Apr 03 for review and response. The discharge...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02296
On 30 May 2001, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied applicant’s requests to change the narrative reason and authority for his separation and to change his RE code (Exhibit C). Applicant has not submitted evidence of any errors or injustices that occurred in the processing of his discharge, nor provided facts warranting a change to the narrative reason for his separation or RE code. Applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-00871
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00871 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His discharge be changed to a disability discharge/retirement. The HQ AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: Copies of...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01026
Whereas the Air Force rates a member's disability based on the degree of severity at the time of separation. The BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPD recommends the application be denied. Whereas the Air Force rates a member's disability based on the degree of severity at the time of separation.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-00049
The applicant’s other conditions were not separately unfitting at the time of evaluation in the disability evaluation system and did not warrant separate ratings. The BCMR Medical Consultant states the fact the applicant has been granted certain service connected disability rating from the DVA does not entitle him to Air Force disability compensation or a change in existing military disability ratings. The BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-03661
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-03291 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be set aside and she be given a disability retirement. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The discharge she received was...
The BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPD recommends the application be denied. The AFPC/DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: Complete copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 15 February 2002, for review and response. Whereas, the Air Force rates a member's disability at the time of separation.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03012
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-03012 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. Although the pathology report of removed tissues were consistent with Crohn’s Disease, medical records between the time of his August 1985 hospital discharge and his...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00064
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00064 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 8 JUL 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her separation date be changed from 12 September 2002 to 19 September 2002. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The records...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2001-03406
On 14 February 2001, the commander notified the applicant that he was recommending his discharge with an entry-level separation for a condition that interferes with military service, specifically, for a mental disorder. The AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C. The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that the applicant’s records document an unsuiting adjustment disorder and a history of mood disorder, possibly bipolar disorder existing prior to...