SECOND ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
DOCKET NUMBER: BC-1984-02252
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
IN THE MATTER OF:
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
1. His record should be corrected to reflect no reference of
him being gay or homosexual.
2. He be retired by reason of physical disability.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
A similar appeal was considered and denied by the Board, on
23 Jul 84. For an accounting of the facts and circumstances
surrounding the application, and, the rationale of the earlier
decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings at
Exhibit I, with attachments.
On 27 Jun 88, the Board reconsidered and denied another request
that he be retired by reason of physical disability. For an
accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the
application, and, the rationale of the earlier decision by the
Board, see the Addendum to Record of Proceedings at Exhibit J,
with attachments.
On 5 Mar 12, we received the applicant’s request for
reconsideration, dated 4 Jan 11, contending that he should be
medically retired because his medical evaluation was prejudiced
based on a reference to him being gay in his medical records.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a personal
statement.
The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at
Exhibit K.
________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
The Board considered and denied the applicant’s request for
medical retirement, on two occasions, in 1984 and 1988. In his
most recent request, the applicant alleges that he believes his
discharge was unjust because of references to him being gay or
homosexual that may have prejudiced his medical evaluation and
subsequent discharge. However, the applicant has not provided
new relevant evidence which meets the requirements for
reconsideration. In addition, we considered his request to
remove references to him being gay or homosexual; however, we
did not find any statements in his record or other evidence that
supports that his sexual orientation was a factor in his medical
separation. Therefore, in view of the above and in the absence
of new and relevant evidence, we find no basis to reconsider the
applicant’s request.
The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel
will materially add to our understanding of the issue(s)
involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably
considered.
___________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
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-1984-02252 in Executive Session on 7 November 2012,
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit I. Record of Proceedings, undated, w/exhibits.
Exhibit J. Addendum to Record of Proceedings, w/exhibits.
Exhibit K. DD Form 149, dated 4 Jan 11, w/atchs.
Panel Chair
2
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00233
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a personal statement and his medical records. The documentation the applicant requests be removed from his records does not exist. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered BCMR Docket Number BC-2012-00233 in Executive Session on 30 August 2012, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 4 Jan 11, w/atchs.
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01315 ADDENDUM
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-1315 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He receive a medical retirement from the Air Force Reserve rather than being discharged. For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicants discharge; and, the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see...
AF | BCMR | CY1994 | BC-1994-02702
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force, which is attached at Exhibit U. Nor does Sergeant K------s memo address the existence of any witness statements. Exhibit P. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 10 Sep 01.
AF | BCMR | CY1984 | BC 1984 00027
SECOND ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-1984-00027 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to general (under honorable conditions). For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicants appeal and the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Addendum to Record of Proceedings, with attachments, at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY1990 | BC 1990 02737 2
On 20 August 2009, a copy of the FBI report was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit L). _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: In earlier findings, the Board determined that there was insufficient evidence to warrant correcting the records to upgrade the applicants discharge. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-01427-3
By letter, dated 26 Jul 10, the applicant provided a response to the advisories; stating neither he or his attorney received copies of the Air Force evaluations and had the Board been provided the additional letters of support, with the recommended change to his OER closing 14 Feb 84, he believes the recommended change to the rater and additional rater comments would have rendered more positive results (Exhibit H). He attached previous correspondence from the AFBCMR staff; however, in this...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC 2008 01427 3
By letter, dated 26 Jul 10, the applicant provided a response to the advisories; stating neither he or his attorney received copies of the Air Force evaluations and had the Board been provided the additional letters of support, with the recommended change to his OER closing 14 Feb 84, he believes the recommended change to the rater and additional rater comments would have rendered more positive results (Exhibit H). He attached previous correspondence from the AFBCMR staff; however, in this...
AF | BCMR | CY1986 | BC 1986 04163 3
On 4 May 09, the applicant submitted a request for reconsideration of his request to have his general discharge upgraded to honorable. The reasons for his discharge are well documented in his record. Exhibit L. Applicant's Reconsideration Request, dated 4 Sep 09.
AF | BCMR | CY1986 | BC 1986 01455; BC 1996 00399
Dr. A provides a separate opinion in the applicants case, concluding the applicant does not have a personality disorder, and never had a personality disorder. In fact, contrary to the circumstances in the noted case, Counsel has argued that the applicants service over the course of the years between his service in Vietnam and his adjustment disorder diagnosis was impeccable and has presented no evidence to indicate there were similar circumstances at play in the applicants case. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-1986-01455; BC-1996-00399
His records be corrected to reflect he was retired for physical disability for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and/or major depression, rather than discharged for a personality disorder. Dr. A provides a separate opinion in the applicant’s case, concluding the applicant does not have a personality disorder, and never had a personality disorder. In fact, contrary to the circumstances in the noted case, Counsel has argued that the applicant’s service over the course of the years...