RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02923 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His discharge be corrected to show that he was placed on the 
Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL). 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He was discharged due to alcohol abuse; however, it was his 
method of self-medication for his anxiety condition. His 
anxiety condition was later determined to be service aggravated 
and rated 30 percent disabling by the Department of Veterans 
Affairs (DVA). 

 

In support of the request, the applicant provides copies of a 
letter from the Indiana American Legion, his AF Form 356, Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) Findings and 
Recommended Disposition of USAF Physical Evaluation Board; and a 
University of Manitoba Research Summary website extract. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 27 Jan 09, the applicant entered the Regular Air Force. 

 

On 29 Mar 10, the applicant was notified of pending discharge 
action. Specifically, the commander cited conduct prejudicial 
to good order and discipline as the basis for discharge. The 
applicant’s misconduct included two Articles 15, Record of 
Nonjudicial Punishment Proceedings, Uniform Code of Military 
Justice, for failure to refrain from drinking alcohol while 
under the age of 21 years and for physically controlling a 
vehicle while his blood alcohol concentration was .10, and a 
Letter of Reprimand for disobeying a direct order by driving on 
base with suspended driving privileges. 

 

On 7 Apr 10, the applicant was referred to the IPEB for 
generalized anxiety disorder (existed prior to service), 
aggravated by the service with panic disorder with agoraphobia. 

 


 

 

The IPEB recommended placement on the TDRL with a disability 
rating of 30 percent. 

 

On 19 Apr 10, the applicant concurred with the findings of the 
IPEB. However, since the applicant had a final recommendation 
of unfit and an administrative action pending, his case was 
processed as a dual action case and forwarded to the Secretary 
of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) for a final 
determination. 

 

On 17 May 10, and after reviewing all the facts and 
circumstances of the case, SAFPC directed discharge and noted 
that while the applicant’s condition may have been an aggravator 
of his stress, it did not form the basis of his choices to 
engage in misconduct. Further, SAFPC opined that the 
applicant’s symptoms reflected a non-service related natural 
progression of his pre-existing condition. 

 

On 28 May 10, the applicant was discharged with a UOTHC 
discharge and with a narrative reason for separation of 
Misconduct-Other. He is credited with one year, four months, 
and two days of active service. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

HQ AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial. DPSOS states the applicant’s 
narrative reason for separation, to include the characterization 
of service, was consistent with the procedural and substantive 
requirements of the discharge instruction and was within the 
discretion of the discharge authority. Further, the applicant 
did not submit any evidence or identify any error or injustices 
that occurred in the discharge processing. He provided no facts 
warranting an upgrade to his discharge characterization. 

 

The complete DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

HQ AFPC/DPSD recommends denial. DPSD states the preponderance 
of evidence reflects that no error or injustice occurred during 
the disability process or at the time of the applicant’s 
separation. 

 

The complete DPSD evaluation is at Exhibit D. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: 

 

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the 
applicant on 25 Mar 11 for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit E). As of this date, this office has not received a 
response. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial. The BCMR Medical 
Consultant concedes alcohol use commonly accompanies a 
disturbance of mood, e.g., anxiety and/or depression, either as 
a precipitating cause or may result in its usage. However, the 
applicant was given the opportunity to comply with the full 
participation in treatment program, which included medications, 
psychotherapy, and the ADAPT program, to address his domestic, 
anxiety, and alcohol-related problems, yet he elected to 
continue to violate the law (underage drinking). The BCMR 
Medical Consultant is of the opinion that the applicant has not 
met the burden of proof of a material error or injustice that 
justifies the desired change of record. 

 

The complete BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at 
Exhibit F. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

A copy of the BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation was forwarded 
to the applicant on 14 Jun 11 for review and comment within 
30 days (Exhibit G). As of this date, this office has not 
received a response. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 injustice. We took 
notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the 
merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and 
recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary 
responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our 
conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or 
injustice. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find 


no basis for us 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 AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2010-02923 in Executive Session on 21 July 2011, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 Panel Chair 

 Member 

 Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 30 June 2010, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Military Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOS, Letter, dated 13 January 2011. 

 Exhibit D. AFPC/DPSD, Letter, dated 2 February 2011. 

 Exhibit E. SAF/MRBR, Letter, dated 25 March 2011, 

 w/atch. 

 Exhibit F. BCMR Medical Consultant, Letter, dated 

 13 May 2011. 

 Exhibit G. SAF/MRBR, Letter, dated 14 June 2011, w/atch. 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair