RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2008-01319
            INDEX CODE:  110.00
            COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general  (under  honorable  conditions)  discharge  be  upgraded  to  an
honorable discharge or changed to a medical discharge.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His medical problem and his good Airman Performance Report (APR) grades  are
justification for his request.

In support of his request, the applicant provided a personal statement.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 30  August  1985  in  the
grade of airman basic.  He served as a Fire Protection Specialist.

On 5 August 1988, the applicant was notified by his commander of his  intent
to recommend that he be discharged from the Air Force under  the  provisions
of AFR 39-10, paragraph 5-46.  The specific reasons  for  this  action  were
Letters of Counseling (LOCs) for failure to meet  a  scheduled  appointment,
failure to go, and for a returned check.  He also received three Letters  of
Reprimand (LORs) for failures to meet  his  maximum  allowable  weight.   On
4 May 1988, his Non-Commissioned Officer (NCO) status  was  vacated  because
of his unsatisfactory performance.

He was advised of his rights in this matter and acknowledged receipt of  the
notification  on  that  same  date.   After  consulting  with  counsel   the
applicant submitted a conditional waiver.  He requested that  he  receive  a
general discharge.  In a legal review of the  case  file,  the  staff  judge
advocate found the case legally sufficient and recommended discharge.  On  4
October 1988, the discharge authority  concurred  with  the  recommendations
and directed discharge with  a  general  discharge,  without  probation  and
rehabilitation.  The applicant was discharged on 5 October 1988.  He  served
7 years, 1 month and 6 days on active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The  AFBCMR  Medical  Consultant  recommends  denial.   The  AFBCMR  Medical
Consultant states that in order for a service member to be considered for  a
medical discharge, he/she must have an  illness  or  injury  that  precludes
continuation on active duty.  As a  consequence,  a  service  member's  case
would be referred for a Medical Evaluation Board followed by  an  assessment
of fitness to serve by a Physical Evaluation Board.  Several  factors  would
be considered in the determination of an individual's fitness to  serve,  to
include the impact of a service member's ability to perform the  duties  for
which he or she has  been  trained  to  perform,  medical  documentation  of
profile restrictions prohibiting worldwide  qualification  for  12  or  more
months, or if a condition poses an unreasonable  health  and  mission  risk,
among other factors.  The applicant alleges that he sustained a head  injury
("hit and run") in 1985 while attending a unit activity; following which  he
developed and currently experiences  headaches,  despite  "many  medications
and [ablative] procedures."  In a supplemental letter to  the  Board,  date-
stamped 12 February 2008, the applicant alleges that "the reason he did  not
want a medical discharge was because he wanted to be a civilian  firefighter
and therefore could not be  one  with  a  medical  discharge."   The  AFBCMR
Medical Consultant reviewed the applicant's weight management  failures  and
noted that the applicant did not meet standards on 14 January 1988, but  was
subjected to a repeat weigh-in three days later on 17 January  1988.   While
the applicant could have sought means  of  rapid  weight-loss  within  three
days, e.g., use of a diuretic,  starvation,  self-induced  dehydration,  the
Medical Consultant finds,  by  today's  standards,  this  short  intervening
period unreasonable to have significantly and  safely  restored  his  weight
standards.  Nonetheless, the applicant had numerous other minor  infractions
which, if one weight failure was eliminated, would have been  sufficient  to
result in the general discharge characterization he  received.   The  AFBCMR
Medical Consultant finds no error or injustice that would justify  a  change
in the record.

The AFBCMR Medical Consultant's complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________








APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 8 September 2008, a copy of the AFBCMR  Medical  Consultant's  evaluation
was forwarded to the  applicant  for  review  and  comment  within  30  days
(Exhibit D).  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 an error or injustice.  After reviewing the evidence of  record
we are not persuaded that the applicant’s discharge should be upgraded.   We
believe he has failed to demonstrate his commander  exceeded  his  authority
or that the reason  for  the  discharge  was  inaccurate  or  inappropriate.
Absent evidence to the contrary, it appears  responsible  officials  applied
appropriate standards in effecting the separation, and we find  no  evidence
that pertinent regulations were violated or that he  was  not  afforded  all
the rights to which entitled at the time of discharge.   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 for a medical discharge, other than his own assertions,  we  see  no
evidence which would lead us to believe that at the time of his  separation,
a  physical  condition  existed  that  would  have  disqualified  him   from
worldwide military service.  Therefore, we see no reason why he  would  have
been eligible for consideration in the  disability  evaluation  system.   In
view of the above and in the absence of evidence to the  contrary,  we  find
no basis upon which to recommend favorable action on this application.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented  did  not  demonstrate  the
existence of an error or injustice; the application  was  denied  without  a
personal appearance; and 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-2008-
01319 in Executive Session on 18 November 2008, under the provisions of  AFI
36-2603:

                 Mr. Gregory A. Parker, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Jeffery R. Shelton, Member
                 Ms. Karen A. Holloman, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 3 April 2008, w/atch.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant,
                   dated 3 September 2008.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 September 2008.





                 GREGORY A. PARKER
                 Panel Chair