RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04643 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

______________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be changed to 
a medical discharge. 

 

______________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

In Feb 1983, he was the victim of a Military Sexual Trauma 
(MST), which ultimately required hospitalization for surgical 
intervention to treat severe trauma to his rectum, after which 
he developed Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), which then 
resulted in turning to drugs and alcohol to drown out his pain, 
shame, and embarrassment. 

 

He made a false report to emergency medical personnel at a Air 
Force Hospital regarding a boil on his buttocks, which he 
reported was a recurring medical problem since childhood. He 
was too embarrassed and ashamed and failed to reveal that he had 
been raped. 

 

The Air Force was his life and he has suffered in silence for 
many years. He is now 100 percent permanently and totally 
disabled as determined by the Department of Veterans Affairs 
(DVA) and is still being treated for this MST at a DVA Hospital. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides a four page 
supplemental memorandum describing details of the circumstances 
leading to and following his sexual trauma, copies of statements 
from his physicians, his medical records and other documents in 
support of his request. 

 

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

 

______________________________________________________________ 

 


 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 20 Dec 1979, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force 
for a period of four years. 

 

On 23 Jun 1983 his commander recommended his discharge from the 
Air Force for a pattern of misconduct under the provisions of 
AFR 39-10, Administrative Separation of Airmen. The specific 
reasons for this action were: 

 

 On 15 Sep 1982 he was speeding on base. 

 

 On 8 Oct 1982 he destroyed a pane of glass valued at 
12 pounds. 

 

 On 2 and 9 Oct 1982 he wrote checks which were returned due 
to insufficient funds. 

 

On 9 Oct 1982 he struck an individual in the face. 

 

On 28 Oct 1982 he again wrote a check which was returned 
due to insufficient funds. 

 

On 1 Nov 1982 he failed to appear for a mandatory roll call 
formation. 

 

On 2 Nov 1982 he was late for duty. 

 

On 4 Nov 1982 he failed to show any proficiency during 
weapons load training recertification. 

 

On 5 Nov 1982 he was found sleeping on duty and wearing a 
watch. 

 

On 29 Nov 1982 he reported late for duty. 

 

On 2 and 3 Dec 1982 he failed to go at the time prescribed 
to his appointed place of duty. 

 

On 3 Jan 1983 he was argumentative, used obscene language, 
and failed to obey a lawful order. 

 

On 15 Feb 1983 he wrongfully possessed some quantity of 
marijuana. On 2 Mar 1983 he received an Article 15 and was 
reduced in rank to airman first class (A1C, E-3). 

 

On 7 Apr 1983 he failed to report for duty as directed. 

 

On 21 Apr 1983 he was delinquent in making a payment under 
the Deferred Payment Program. 

 


On 25 Apr 1983 he failed to report for duty at the 
appointed time and place. 

 

On 29 Apr 1983 he failed a scheduled dormitory inspection. 

 

On 12 May 1983 he failed to report for duty at the 
appointed time and place. 

 

On 17 May 1983 he again failed to go at the time prescribed 
to his appointed place of duty. On 20 May he received an 
Article 15 and was reduced in rank to Airman (Amn, E-2). 

 

On 29 Jun 1983, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the 
recommendation for discharge and provided a statement for the 
commander’s consideration. 

 

On 29 Jun 1983, the Staff Judge Advocate reviewed the case and 
found it legally sufficient. 

 

On 12 Jul 1983, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force 
with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge in the 
grade of Amn. He served 3 years, 6 months, and 23 days of total 
active service. 

 

______________________________________________________________ 

 

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. We took notice 
of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of 
the case; however, we find no evidence of an error or injustice 
that occurred in the discharge processing. Based on the 
available evidence of record, it appears the discharge was 
consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge 
regulation and within the commander's discretionary authority. 
The applicant has provided no evidence which would lead us to 
believe the discharge was contrary to the provisions of the 
governing regulation, unduly harsh, or disproportionate to the 
offenses committed. In this respect we note that although the 
applicant required surgical treatment during his military 
service, the evidence does not reflect the condition for which 
he was treated was permanently disabling or prevented him from 
reasonably performing his military duties. Moreover, even if 
the applicant was diagnosed with a disqualifying medical 
condition prior to his separation, he would have concurrently 
been the subject of a "dual action" review [medical and 
administrative] by the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel 


Council which would have still rendered the applicant vulnerable 
for an administrative discharge; considering the drug abuse and 
multiple other infractions prior to the incident that reportedly 
caused a downward spiral of his Air Force career. The Board 
empathizes with the ordeal reportedly experienced by the 
applicant during his military service and is very pleased to see 
he is receiving the necessary care and compensation by the 
National Institutes of Health and the DVA since leaving military 
service. However, in view of the above and absent persuasive 
evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to 
recommend granting the relief sought. 

 

______________________________________________________________ 

 

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 this application 
in Executive Session on 5 Sep 2012, under the provisions of AFI 
36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

, Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence pertaining to BC-2011-04643 
was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 9 Nov 2011, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair