RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-00940 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: YES 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His narrative reason for separation (Attrition, Unsuitability-
Character and Behavior Disorders) be removed. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He believes his narrative reason for separation is in error and 
unjust. His psychologist states that his behavior was normal for 
a man in his position and that his behavior was not sociopathic. 

 

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

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 24 June 1969. 
He served as an AC&W Radar Operator. 

 

On 24 March 1971, the applicant was notified by his commander of 
his intent to recommend that he be discharged from the Air Force 
under the provisions of AFM 39-12, chapter 2, paragraph 2-4b 
(unsuitability - character and behavior disorders - individual 
evaluation). The specific reasons are as follows: 

 

 a. On or about 14 December 1970, he failed to obey a written 
order. 

 

 b. On or about 18 December 1970, he failed to report for 
duty as scheduled. 

 

 c. On 19 December 1970, he received a psychiatric evaluation 
and was found to have no psychiatric disorder requiring action. 

 

 d. On or about 31 December 1970, he failed to report for 
duty. 


 

 e. According to his senior director and crew chief, his duty 
performance, attitude and regard for military procedures and 
policy were substandard. 

 

 f. On 18 January 1971, he failed to report to his appointed 
place of duty at the proper time. For this incident, he was 
issued a written reprimand. 

 

 g. On 23 February 1971, he failed to return to his appointed 
place of duty to complete a regular scheduled appointment with 
the Mental Health Clinic as instructed. 

 

 h. On repeated occasions, under direct counseling, he 
flagrantly violated Air Force uniform and personal appearance 
policies and directives. 

 

He was advised of his rights in this matter and acknowledged 
receipt of the notification on that same date. The applicant 
waived his right to counsel and elected not to submit statements 
on his own behalf. 

 

The applicant was discharged on 16 April 1971 with a general 
discharge. He served 1 year, 9 months and 23 days on active 
duty. 

 

On 20 September 2007, the Air Force Board for Correction of 
Military Records (AFBCMR) considered and approved the applicant's 
request that his service characterization be upgraded to 
honorable from general (under honorable conditions) based on 
clemency (Exhibit B). 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial. The AFBCMR 
Medical Consultant states the fact the applicant received 
treatment for an Axis 1 diagnosis of depression and anxiety since 
2008, does not invalidate the clinical present findings at the 
time of his separation; nor does it imply that his newly 
diagnosed conditions were present at the time of discharge, or 
should have been considered in the discharge action. Thus, the 
Consultant opines that the evaluators "on the ground" at the 
time of the applicant's military service likely had a better 
awareness of the applicant's mental functioning at the time 
rather than the retrospective analysis (hypothesis) offered 30+ 
years later. The Medical Consultant opines that the applicant 
has not met the burden of proof that he did not display elements 
of a character or behavior disorder during the period leading to 
his discharge. Nonetheless, the Board has the authority to 
consider Secretarial Authority as the reason for discharge, since 
the justification for the applicant's discharge upgrade was based 
upon clemency, noting the collective impact of his youth and 


immaturity, and the concurrent stressors of his overseas 
assignment and a failed marriage. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

The applicant reviewed the evaluation and states he does not 
understand why his original DD Form 214 reflects a narrative 
reason of SDN 265, Letter 12 CSG (PACAF) dated 9 April 1971 and 
section A, chapter 2 AFM 39-12 and the new DD Form 214 issued 
reflects a narrative reason of Attrition, Unsuitability - 
Character and Behavior Disorder. 

 

The applicant's complete response, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit E. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 
carefully reviewing the evidence of record, we are not persuaded 
that the applicant’s narrative reason for separation should be 
changed. Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation 
of the AFBCMR Medical Consultant and adopt his rationale as the 
basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the 
victim of an error or injustice. In the absence of evidence to 
the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting 
the relief sought. With regard to the applicant’s concern 
regarding the narrative reason as it is reflected on his current 
DD Form 214, the original DD Form 214 is now an obsolete version 
and the current version requires the narrative reason for 
separation be annotated. The narrative reason correctly 
correlates to the previous reason for separation. Therefore, a 
change to the current DD Form 214 is not appropriate. 

 

4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not 
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel 
will materially add to our understanding of the issue involved. 
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

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-2009-00940 in Executive Session on 22 October 2009, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Vice Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2009-00940 was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 23 February 2009, w/atch. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, 

 dated 5 August 2009. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 August 2009. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 11 August 2009, w/atchs. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Vice Chair