RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-02256
            INDEX CODE:  110.00

            COUNSEL:  MR. JOSEPH W. RUSSELL

            HEARING DESIRED: NO


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  30 JANUARY 2008


___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His under honorable conditions (general) discharge  be  upgraded  to
honorable.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Due to his medical condition  he  should  have  been  discharged  for
physical disqualification.  His outbursts of anger during the  period
in question were directly related to his medical  condition  and  not
intentional.

In support of his appeal, applicant submitted a Narrative Summary  of
Medical Record, Memorandums, Department of Veterans Affairs (VA),  VA
Letters, DD forms 214 and Reserve Order 491.

Applicant's complete submission,  with  attachments,  is  attached  at
Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Air Force Reserves  (AFRes)  on  10 October
1990 for a period of six years.

On 20 February 2004, the applicant was  notified  of  his  commander’s
intent to recommend him for discharge from the Air Force Reserves  for
misconduct, pattern of misconduct, conduct prejudicial to  good  order
and discipline.  The specific reasons for the discharge action were:

      a.    In  2001,  the  applicant  received  a  referral  Enlisted
Performance Report (EPR) and received mentoring  and  feedback  on  23
February 2002 and 6 April 2003.

      b.    On 30 July  2002,  the  applicant  received  a  Letter  of
Reprimand (LOR) for using profanity  at  work,  raging  at  other  co-
workers, and failure to follow vehicle safety requirements.

      c.    On 15 November 2002, the applicant was demoted for failure
in NCO responsibilities.   He  was  observed  to  be  belligerent  and
noncooperative during a mobility training exercise and displayed other
inappropriate behaviors during his duty.  The applicant  concurred  in
the demotion action, did not provide any written matters and  did  not
appeal.

      d.    On 8 August 2003, the applicant received  a  LOR  with  an
Unfavorable Information File (UIF) entry for  inappropriate  behavior.
While off base, he displayed  inappropriate  behavior  by  tailgating,
passing at a high rate of speed and making obscene gestures to another
driver who was the 439th Operations Group Commander.  In his  rebuttal
he accepts responsibility for his actions and  explains  his  behavior
was due to his “bad mood that day”.

The commander advised  applicant  that  military  counsel  had  been
obtained to assist  him;  present  his  case  to  an  administrative
discharge board; be represented by legal counsel at a board hearing;
submit statements in his own behalf in addition to, or in  lieu  of,
the board hearing; or waive the above rights after  consulting  with
counsel.

The commander indicated in his recommendation for discharge  that  he
consulted the first sergeant, applicant and the NCOIC and stated that
after more than five years of efforts on his part as well as those of
his peers and  supervisors,  it  seemed  apparent  to  him  that  the
applicant is not cut out  to  be  in  the  Air  Force  Reserve.   The
commander further stated in all  of  this  time,  with  a  myriad  of
counseling, reprimand, mentoring, guidance and assorted  disciplines,
both formal and informal, the applicant’s behavior had not  improved.
It appears the applicant is either unable or unwilling  to  make  the
necessary changes to bring him up to Air Force standards.

A legal review was  conducted  in  which  the  staff  judge  advocate
recommended the applicant receive an undesirable discharge.

On 12 March 2004, the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) found
the applicant unfit to perform the duties of his  office,  grade,  or
rank, after diagnosing him with “Obsessive Compulsive  Disorder  with
Anger Management Issues.”

On 29 March 2004, the applicant indicated he did not desire  to  have
his case referred to the Formal Physical Evaluation  Board  (FPEB)  s
(undesirable) discharge.

On 7  May  2004,  a  memorandum  of  notification  of  initiation  of
discharge for physical notification was forwarded to  the  applicant.
The applicant acknowledged receipt.

Applicant was discharged from the Air  Force  Reserve  on  15 October
2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-3209 for Misconduct, a patter of
misconduct, conduct prejudicial to good order  discipline  (Primary),
and Physical Disqualification.

The applicant appealed  to  the  Air  Force  Discharge  Review  Board
(AFDRB) to have his UOTHC discharge upgraded to general.   On  6 June
2006, the AFDRB granted the applicant’s appeal for an upgrade of  his
discharge to general, based on the UOTHC was harsh  when  considering
the severity of the misconduct.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFRC/JA recommends denial.  AFRC/JA  states  the  applicant’s  records
were reviewed by HQ AFRC/HC and  they  found  the  applicant’s  mental
health condition may  have  mitigated  any  adverse  action,  but  not
eradicate it.  The applicant knew right from wrong and had the ability
to conform his behavior.  His capacity may have been  diminished,  but
it was not destroyed.  Therefore in  the  2001-2003  time  period  the
applicant was responsible  for  his  actions.   Even  considering  the
limitations placed on him by  his  mental  health  condition,  a  then
noncommissioned officer, with 10 years of military  experience  cannot
exhibit a patter of disrespect for superiors, colleagues,  and  fellow
servicemembers without accountability.

AFRC/JA 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
22 December 2006, for review  and  response.   As  of  this  date,  no
response has been received by this office.

___________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.    The applicant has exhausted all remedies  provided  by  existing
law or regulations.

2.    The application was timely filed.

3.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of an error or an injustice.   We  took  notice  of  the
applicant's complete submission in judging the  merits  of  the  case;
however, the Board majority agrees with the opinion and recommendation
of the Air Force and  adopts  its  rationale  as  the  basis  for  its
decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden  that  he
has  suffered  either  an  error  or  an  injustice.   Based  on   the
documentation in the applicant's records, it  appears  the  processing
and  the  characterization  of  the  discharge  were  appropriate  and
accomplished in accordance  with  Air  Force  policy.   The  applicant
contends he is mentally incompetent and his  mental  condition  is  so
severe  that  he  requires  medication.   However,  Behavioral  Health
reviewed  the  applicant’s  records  and  determined  the  applicant’s
condition may mitigate any adverse action, but it does  not  eradicate
it.  Furthermore, the applicant knew right  from  wrong  and  had  the
ability to conform his behavior and was responsible  for  his  actions
during that time period.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the
contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief
sought in this application.

_________________________________________________________________

THE MAJORITY OF 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2006-02256  in  Executive  Session  on  21  February  2007  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                       Mr. Michael J. Novel, Panel Chair
                       Mr. Reginald P. Howard, Member
                       Ms. Barbara R. Murray, Member

By majority vote, the Board recommended denying the  application.  Ms.
Murray voted to grant the relief requested  but  does  not  desire  to
submit a Minority Report.   The  following  documentary  evidence  was
considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 1 Aug 06, w/atch.
   Exhibit B.  Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFRC/JA, dated 1 Dec 06.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 Dec 06.




                                        MICHAEL J. NOVEL
                                        Panel Chair