RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00417 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded 
to honorable. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

1. His discharge was inequitable because it was not based on 
statements from medical experts but solely on the views of his 
first sergeant. 

 

2. The decision to discharge him was made while he was being 
treated for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and 
depression. 

 

3. He was involved in a head-on motor vehicle accident where his 
friend and the driver of the other vehicle were both killed. 
While driving back from the hospital he suffered an anxiety 
attack. His first sergeant stated he should “expect this type 
of thing and life would be difficult for awhile.” 

 

4. He was young; did not consider his first sergeant was not 
medically trained to make this assessment and accepted his 
judgment based on his rank, believing all the episodes he had 
experienced were normal and would eventually pass in time. 

 

5. At the request of his first sergeant, his commander 
discharged him despite his treatment for PTSD and depression. 
He commander stated his discharge was “purely duty performance 
related.” 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of his 
medical records and a personal statement. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 21 Jun 00, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force. 

 


On 28 Jun 02, the applicant was notified of his commander’s 
intent to recommend he be discharged from the Air Force under 
the provisions of AFPD 36-32, Air Force Military Training and 
AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, paragraph 
5.50.2, A Pattern of Misconduct, specifically, Conduct 
Prejudicial to Good Order and Discipline. 

 

The specific reasons for this action were: 

 

On or about 8 May 01, the applicant reported late to work for 
the third time. For this misconduct, he received a letter of 
admonition (LOA). 

 

On or about 13 Nov 01, the applicant without authority absented 
himself from his place of duty. For this misconduct, he 
received a letter of reprimand (LOR). 

 

On or about 29 Jan 02, the applicant failed to go to his 
appointed place of duty. For this misconduct, he received a 
letter of counseling (LOC). 

 

On or about 7 Mar 02, the applicant disobeyed an order. For 
this misconduct, he received a LOR. 

 

On or about 15 Mar 02, the applicant without authority absented 
himself from his place of duty. For this misconduct, he 
received a LOA. 

 

On 3 Apr and 10 Apr 02, the applicant failed to go to his 
appointed place of duty. For this misconduct, he received an 
Article 15, UCMJ, reduction to the grade of airman (E-2), 
forfeiture of $100 pay per month for two months and 30 days 
extra duty. The reduction in grade, forfeiture of pay and 
15 days extra duty was suspended until 14 Nov 02, at which time 
it was to be remitted without further action, unless sooner 
vacated. 

 

On or about 24 May 02, the applicant was derelict in the 
performance of his duties by willfully failing to sweep the 
front lot, clean the drains in the stall door areas, and sweep 
and remove trash from the storage lot at the Auto Hobby Shop as 
his extra duties. For this misconduct, the suspension of his 
reduction in rank to E-2, forfeiture of $100 pay per month for 
two months and 15 days extra duty was vacated on 14 Nov 02. 

 

On 3 Jul 02, the Acting Staff Judge Advocate recommended to the 
Wing Commander that the applicant be discharged and issued a 
general discharge without probation and rehabilitation. 
On 8 Jul 02, the discharge authority approved the applicant’s 
discharge. 

 

On 12 Jul 02, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force 
with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge in the 


grade of airman. He served 2 years and 22 days of total active 
service. 

 

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of 
Investigations (FBI) Clarksburg, WV, states they were unable to 
identify an arrest record on the basis of the information 
furnished (Exhibit C). 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial. The Medical 
Consultant states comments contained in the response memo 
included references to inadequate sleep patterns bouts of 
depression, migraines and incorrectly self-administering various 
medications. In review of the medical treatment regimen, 
regular contact with life skills and mental health clinics and 
ongoing signs and symptoms throughout the treatment course, it 
is highly probable that the applicant was exhibiting signs of 
post-concussion syndrome which often occurs with a loss of 
consciousness following significant head trauma and may exhibit 
a prolonged period of adverse neurological manifestations. 
While there is no clear evidence that the prescribed medical 
treatment caused the pattern of unacceptable behavior the 
reviewer opines that it is plausible to conclude that the 
prescribed medications and their documented side effects could 
present a significant mitigating circumstance for the 
demonstrated behavior pattern. In cases where a preponderance 
of evidence clearly demonstrates an error or injustice a 
justifiable correction is warranted. In the case under review 
the Medical Advisor finds the available evidence insufficient to 
make such a determination. 

 

The complete BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit D. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the 
applicant on 23 Sep 11 for review and comment within 15 days 
(Exhibit E). 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 error or injustice. After 
thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record, we find no evidence 
to indicate that his discharge from the Air Force was 
inappropriate, or that the actions taken to affect his discharge 
and the characterization of his service were improper, or 
contrary to the provisions of the governing regulations in 
effect at the time. Therefore, we agree with the opinion and 
recommendation of the BCMR Medical Consultant and adopt his 
rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not 
been the victim of an error or injustice. In addition, we find 
insufficient evidence to warrant a recommendation that the 
discharge be upgraded on the basis of clemency. We have 
considered the applicant’s overall record of service, and the 
events which precipitated the discharge; however, we do not find 
the evidence presented is sufficient to compel us to recommend 
granting the relief sought on that basis. In the absence of 
persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no basis 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-2011-00417 in Executive Session on 3 Nov 11, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 Panel Chair 

Member 

 Member 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


The following documentary evidence was pertaining to AFBCMR 
Docket Number BC-2011-00417 WAS considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 26 Jan 11. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. FBI Investigation, dated 14 Mar 11. 

 Exhibit D. BCMR Medical Consultant Letter, dated 19 Sep 11. 

 Exhibit E. SAF/MRBC, Letter, dated 23 Sep 11. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair