RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-03075
XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His narrative reason for separation of “Entry Level Performance and Conduct” be changed to an “honorable medical discharge.”
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was diagnosed as a paranoid schizophrenic while in the Air Force and was told he was being discharged with an honorable medical discharge. He also does not understand why his narrative reason for separation includes mention of his conduct when he did everything he was told to do while in the service.
The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military personnel records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force. Accordingly, there is no need to recite these facts in this Record of Proceedings.
________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial, indicating the applicant has not met the burden of proof of an error or injustice that warrants the desired change of the record. The record shows the applicant entered military service on 24 Oct 84. His service medical records indicate that he was subjected to a mental health evaluation which included a battery of psychological assessments with results that suggest he was dissatisfied with the Security Police Air Force Specialty (AFS) and was willing to do whatever it took to meet his own needs. The psychologist entered a diagnosis of malingering with immature and schizoid type personality traits and recommended his administrative separation. The applicant acknowledged receipt of the commander’s notification letter, as well as his right to consult counsel and submit statements in his own behalf. The discharge action was found to be legally sufficient on 29 Mar 85 and the discharge authority subsequently approved the commander’s recommendation. On 5 Apr 85, the applicant was furnished an Entry-level separation (ELS) with uncharacterized service. The applicant was diagnosed with a condition not considered a disability which did not qualify him for a disability separation. Under current standards an individual who has demonstrated the inability to adjust to military service, or an inability to perform military duties, within the first 180 days of service, may be discharged as an ELS. Due to the relatively brief period of service, it has been determined inappropriate and unfair to the member or the department, to characterize such a brief period of service.
A complete copy of the AFBCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the AFBCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 29 Apr 11 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D).
________________________________________________________________
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 careful consideration of applicant's request and the available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant corrective action. The facts and opinions stated in the advisory opinion appear to be based on the evidence of record and have not been adequately rebutted by the applicant. Absent persuasive evidence the applicant was denied rights to which he was entitled, appropriate regulations were not followed, or appropriate standards were not applied, we find no basis to disturb the existing record.
________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material 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-2010-03075 in Executive Session on 2 Jun 11, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. XXXXXXXXXXX, Panel Chair
Ms. XXXXXXXXXXX, Member
Mr. XXXXXXXXXXX, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 18 Aug 10.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant,
dated 27 Apr 11.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Apr 11.
XXXXXXXXXXX
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2010-03211
On 30 Mar 98, the applicant’s commander notified him of his intention to recommend his discharge from the Air Force for homosexual conduct under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen . The applicant does not provide any proof of an error or injustice with respect to the RE code he was issued in conjunction with his ELS with uncharacterized service. Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the applicant’s entry-level separation (ELS) for homosexual...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03075
A list of the applicants FAs since she entered the service is as follows: Date Composite Score Sit-Ups Rating 3 Jul 13 75.67 Exempt Satisfactory *15 Apr 13 81.00 25/0.00 Unsatisfactory 23 Nov 12 87.10 38/6.00 Satisfactory 16 Apr 12 84.10 42/7.50 Satisfactory *Contested FA On 16 Dec 13, a similar request was considered and denied by the Fitness Assessments Appeals Board (FAAB), on the basis that, The applicants injury was validated by the applicants medical provider, but there was no...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00933
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00933 INDEX CODE: 106.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: Yes MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 19 Sep 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His 1985 general discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 6 Nov 85, the commander recommended the applicant be separated with a general discharge for drug abuse. Accordingly, we recommend...
_______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She was selected for promotion to SSgt twice, but never promoted due to weight problems and placement on the Weight Management Program (WMP), problems that were later determined to be medical in nature (diagnosed with severe narcolepsy). Her section commander subsequently requested reinstatement of her selection that was to be effective 1 Apr 99. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03658
The applicant’s performance reports are provided at Exhibit B. Available records pertaining to the applicant’s medical issues are at Exhibit B, and the AFBCMR Medical Consultant provides medical details in his advisory at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The AFBCMR Medical Consultant’s review of the applicant’s service records revealed no reference to participation in combat or events similar to those described by the...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03925
The applicants complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR) which are attached at Exhibits C and D. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. The RE Code of 2C is required based on the ELS...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03297
In support of her request, the applicant provided a Mental Health Evaluation, dated 28 Jun 06, from the Life Skills Support Center, 90 MDOS/SGOH, F.E. Warren AFB, WY, recommending a waiver for reenlistment because her adjustment disorder had resolved and “there was no evidence of a mental health condition or a personality disorder at this time.” The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. As personality disorders are frequently exacerbated by stress, they may...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-00314 INDEX CODES 110.02 111.02 111.05 126.04 134.01 134.02 XXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: No XXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her 1984 general discharge for “Misconduct - Pattern of Minor Disciplinary Infractions” be upgraded to honorable and the narrative reason be changed to “Medical...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02863
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02863 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His disability be reevaluated and his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable. The applicant appealed to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (DRB) to have his UOTHC discharge upgraded to honorable. A...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03075
The relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force. The applicant did provide a copy of his AF Form 108, dated 7 Jun 12; however, it has no comments on the preexisting conditions. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and noting the applicants contentions, we are not persuaded the contested FA is in error or unjust.