RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02029
INDEX CODE: 110.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her honorable discharge be changed to a medical discharge.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
She was given an early discharge because she was found to be
psychologically unfit to serve.
In support of her request, the applicant suggests the Board review her
military personnel and medical records. The applicant’s complete
submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant contracted her enlistment in the Regular Air Force on
4 October 1978 for a period of four years. She was progressively
promoted to the grade of airman (E-2), with an effective date and date
of rank of 4 April 1979.
On 15 August 1979, the applicant submitted a request for separation
under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Chapter 3, Section E (Dependency
and Hardship). Her request was approved by the discharge authority.
She was honorably discharged on 16 August 1979 under the provisions of
AFR 39-10 (SPD code: KDB, which defined means “Hardship Reasons”).
She had completed a total of 10 months and 13 days and was serving in
the grade of airman (E-2) at the time of discharge. She received an
RE Code of “1J”, which defined means "Eligible to reenlist, but elects
separation or discharge.”
The Department of Veteran’s Administration rating decision of 27 June
2003 indicates a denial of applicant’s claims for service-connected
disability.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The BCMR Medical Consultant summarized the information contained in
the applicant’s personnel and medical records and is of the opinion
that no change in the applicant’s record is warranted. The BCMR
Medical Consultant states that no mental health documentation is
present in the personnel file in support of her discharge. Nothing in
the applicant’s letter or the chaplain’s letter makes any reference to
other than stress. The DVA mental health providers have diagnosed the
applicant with Adjustment Disorder during periods of stress. This
condition, when occurring while on active duty, does not make a member
eligible for evaluation in the disability evaluation system, but
rather, can render the member unsuitable for continued military
service and subject to administrative discharge by their commander.
Action and disposition in this case are proper and equitable
reflecting compliance with Air Force directives that implement the
law. Details of his evaluation are at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 19
December 2003 for review and response. As of this date, no response
has been received by this office (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. Her contentions are duly noted;
however, we do not find these uncorroborated assertions, in and by
themselves sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided
by the appropriate Air Force office. In this respect, we note the
evidence of record supports the applicant having symptoms of
situational stress rather than a mental condition warranting
evaluation in the disability system at the time of her discharge. We,
therefore, agree with the opinion and recommendation of the BCMR
Medical Consultant and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for
our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain her burden that
she has suffered either an error or an injustice. In view of the
above and absent evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling 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 Docket Number BC-2003-
02029 in Executive Session on 25 March 2004, under the provisions of
AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Robert S. Boyd, Panel Chair
Mr. Albert C. Ellett, Member
Ms. Beth M. McCormick, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 4 Jun 03.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 8 Dec 03.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Dec 03.
ROBERT S. BOYD
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01694
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01694 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His narrative reason for separation, separation code and reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed to allow eligibility to join the Army National Guard. On 29 August 1984, the applicant received notification that he was being...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03055
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03055 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The reason for her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be changed to reflect hardship. Basis for the action was a Letter of Counseling, in October 1987, for failure to report to duty two consecutive days; four Letters of Reprimand--30 November...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03055
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03055 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The reason for her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be changed to reflect hardship. Basis for the action was a Letter of Counseling, in October 1987, for failure to report to duty two consecutive days; four Letters of Reprimand--30 November...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-00868
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00868 INDEX CODE: 100.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her records be corrected to enable reenlistment into the Air Force. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01172
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01172 INDEX CODE: 112.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her narrative reason for separation and reenlistment eligibility (RE) codes be changed. She was assigned a reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2C, “Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation...
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-2002-04019
The BCMR Consultant states that according to the applicant’s Air National Guard Point Summary, the applicant was not on active duty during his 1982 hospitalization. On 24 November 1982, the applicant underwent a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) that concluded his depression was not incurred while entitled to basic pay and recommended medical disqualification and administrative discharge (not disability discharge). The applicant has not provided any evidence to show an injustice occurred at...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01519
Title 38 USC governs the DVA compensation system in awarding disability percentage ratings for conditions that are not unfitting for military service. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPD states the purpose of the disability evaluation system (DES) is to maintain a fit and vital force by separating or retiring members who are unable to perform the duties of their office, grade, rank or rating. Evidence of record indicates the applicant was...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02025
Included in the file was an impact statement concerning the Letter of Evaluation. In a legal review of the discharge case file dated 13 February 2003, the staff judge advocate found the file was legally sufficient and supported the recommendation that the applicant be separated from the service. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant summarized the information contained in the applicant’s personnel and medical...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01674
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01674 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her narrative reason for separation and Separation Program Designator (SPD) code be changed from “Pregnancy” to “Medically Disqualified not for Cause.” _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT...