RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04216
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
1. The characterization of his discharge be upgraded to
honorable, or in the alternative, to general (under honorable
conditions) due to medical reasons.
2. His former rank of staff sergeant (E-5) be reinstated.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
A medical discharge from the Air Force is justified since the
Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) granted his service-
connection for a disability incurred in 1982 at RAF Lakenheath,
England.
In support of his application, the applicant provides copies of
the DD Forms 214 issued for his periods of active service and a
DVA rating decision dated 20 August 2010.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force who
entered active duty on 4 June 1976 and was released from active
duty and transferred to the Air Force Reserve (AFRes) on
3 June 1980 at the expiration of his term of service. He
subsequently reenlisted in the Reg AF and served on active duty
from 19 January 1981 until 2 December 1982, at which time he was
discharged under the authority of AFM 39-12 (Unsuitability-
Apathy, Defective Attitude), with service characterized as
general (under honorable conditions).
On 6 February 1997, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB)
considered and denied the applicants request for an upgrade of
his discharge characterization. A complete AFDRB hearing record
is at Exhibit C.
On 15 April 2010, the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA)
awarded the applicant a 100 percent service-connected disability
rating for anxiety disorder not otherwise specified (NOS),
depressive disorder NOS, somatoform disorder NOS, and personality
disorder NOS (previously addressed as dysthymic disorder, stress,
and dysphoria disorder.
________________________________________________________________
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD:
We have carefully reviewed the applicants submission and the
evidence of record and do not find a sufficient basis to excuse
the untimely filing of this application. The applicant did not
file within three years after the alleged error or injustice was
discovered as required by Title 10, United States Code, Section
1552 and Air Force Instruction 36-2603, Air Force Board for
Correction of Military Records. The applicant has not shown a
plausible reason for the delay in filing, and we are not
persuaded that the record raises issues of error or injustice
which require resolution on the merits. Thus, we cannot conclude
it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the untimely
filing of this application.
________________________________________________________________
DECISION OF THE BOARD:
The application was not timely filed and it would not be in the
interest of justice to waive the untimeliness. It is the
decision of the Board, therefore, to reject the application as
untimely.
________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2010-04216 in Executive Session on 1 September 2011,
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 6 Nov 2010, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. AFDRB Hearing Record, dated 14 Feb 97.
Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 2 June 11, w/atchs.
Exhibit E. Letter, Kentucky American Legion, not dtd.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05637
On 4 Mar 09, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) notified the applicant that based on his request, a review by the AFDRB was inappropriate and that he should submit his application to the AFBCMR. Even though the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) has granted the applicant service-connection and compensation for a number of medical conditions, but particularly PTSD, the evidence does not reflect PTSD was an unfitting condition at the time of the applicants release from military...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC 2010 02989
On behalf of the applicant, an accredited veterans administration claims agent/veterans advocate, indicated subsequent to the Boards original decision, he was diagnosed with an aggravated chronic mental health condition and was awarded a combined compensable disability rating of 50 percent (Major Depressive Disorder) by the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA). In this respect, we note that while the two supporting statements indicate the applicant suffers from major depressive disorder...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05813
The pattern of maladaptive behavior exhibited near the beginning of BMT is more consistent with the assigned mental health diagnosis of schizotal (schizotypal) personality disorder, not schizophrenia. The complete Medical evaluation is at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A representative from the state Office of Veterans Affairs states the applicants 100 percent service connected disability was recognized by the Air Force as a personality disorder (schizophrenia) and...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00281
A Medical Evaluation Board convened on 16 April 2010, and recommended the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) consider the following conditions incurred while the applicant was entitled to basic pay; anxiety disorder, Not Otherwise Specified (NOS) and depressive disorder, NOS. According to an AF Form 1180, Action on Informal Physical Evaluation Board Findings and Recommended Disposition, on 19 July 2010, the applicant agreed with the findings of the IPEB and waived his right to a...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01253
He requests his discharge be reviewed for upgrade due to this evidence not being considered during his Air Force service. On 30 May 1977, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) upgraded the applicant’s service characterization from a bad conduct discharge to general (under honorable conditions). While they were unable to review the record of trial, the applicant alleges no error or injustice in the processing of the special court-martial.
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01645
The Air Force Special Operations Command SJA recommended the applicant be discharged in lieu of trial and directed that he be separated with a, general (under honorable conditions), or UOTHC discharge. A Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) considered the applicants case based on his diagnosis of PTSD and recommended the applicants case be referred to the IPEB. On 18 Mar 10, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied the applicants request for an upgrade of his UOTHC discharge to...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04547
The AFDRB concluded the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority and the applicant was provided full administrative due process. The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C. _____________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He is currently being seen by yet another psychologist whose opinion is that he was never...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01247
On 21 January 2010, the applicant was relieved from active duty and placed on the TDRL, effective 26 February 2010, with a compensable disability rating of 40 percent. The IPEB determined her conditions appeared not likely to change over the next several years and therefore recommended she be permanently retired with a compensable disability rating of 40 percent. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the memoranda prepared by the Air Force office of...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01495
On 31 Jul 89, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied a similar request. We have carefully reviewed applicant's submission and the entire record, and we do not find a sufficient basis to excuse the untimely filing of this application. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Apr 14.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04030
The applicant believes the Board should find it in the interest of justice to consider his untimely application because factual information about cross-dressing did not exist at the time of his discharge. On 13 September 1963, he was notified by his commander that he was recommending he be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39-16, Discharge for Unsuitability. The applicant did not file within three years after the alleged error or injustice was discovered as required...