RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01525 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

1. His other than honorable conditions (general) discharge be 
upgraded to honorable. 

 

2. He be granted a medical retirement. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

The applicant believes he should have been medically retired with 
a 100 percent compensable rating for Post-Traumatic Stress 
Disorder (PTSD). 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 6 Dec 95, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force. On 
22 Sep 97, he was notified by his commander that he was 
recommending his discharge for Minor Disciplinary Infractions. 

 

Between 4 Jun 96 and 30 Jul 97, the applicant received five 
(5) letters of counseling; four (4) letters of reprimand and an 
Article 15 for committing multiple infractions. 

 

On 30 Sep 97, the applicant was separated for misconduct with a 
general (under honorable conditions) discharge after serving 
1 year, 9 months and 25 days of active duty service. 

 

On 28 Oct 98, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied 
the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge to honorable. 
The AFDRB concluded the discharge was consistent with the 
procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge 
regulation, was within the discretion of the discharge authority 
and that the applicant was provided full administrative due 
process. In addition, the AFDRB found no legal or equitable 
basis for upgrade of the applicant’s discharge. 


 

The applicant provided a Rating Decision, dated 29 Jul 10, from 
the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) which indicates he 
currently receives a 70 percent compensable disability rating for 
a major depressive disorder with psychotic features. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

The BCMR Medical Advisor recommends denial. 

 

The Medical Advisor notes a Commander-Directed Mental Health 
Evaluation, contained in the applicant’s records, was ordered on 
10 Mar 97, to determine his mental stability and fitness for 
duty. A mental health provider diagnosed the applicant with Axis 
I, Dysthymic Disorder, described as a chronic depressive disorder 
with symptoms existing prior to service. He also indicated the 
depression did not significantly impact the member’s ability to 
perform his duties. His Axis II diagnosis was listed as 
Personality Disorder; however, he remained world-wide qualified. 
The mental health provider noted “Inappropriate behaviors should 
be addressed through administrative/legal rather than medical 
channels.” Through the applicant’s period of service, he was not 
prescribed medication and no duty limiting profiles were noted. 
He was recommended for administrative separation under the 
provisions of Air Force Instruction 36-3208, Administrative 
Separation of Airmen. 

 

The Medical Advisor states that without sufficient documentation 
of a medical condition or disqualifying mental health condition, 
the action taken to administratively discharge the applicant was 
appropriate. The applicant clearly demonstrated a pattern of 
behavior which justified an administrative separation which was 
not due to any medical treatment or mental health diagnosis. 

 

The Disability Evaluation System (DES), established to maintain a 
fit and vital fighting force, can by law under Title 10, United 
States Code (USC) only offer compensation for those service 
incurred diseases or injuries which specifically rendered a 
member unfit for continued active service and were the cause for 
career termination; and then only for the degree of impairment 
present at the time of separation and not based on future 
occurrences. 

 

The complete BCMR Medical Advisor’s evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 


A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant 
on 17 Dec 12, for review and comment within 30 days. As of this 
date, this office has received no response (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 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 to warrant an upgrade 
to honorable. 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 characterization 
of his service was contrary to the provisions of the governing 
regulation, unduly harsh, or disproportionate to the offenses 
committed. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading 
the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the 
evidence presented is sufficient to compel us to recommend 
granting the relief sought on that basis. Regarding his request 
for a medical retirement, after a thorough review of the evidence 
of record and careful consideration of the applicant's 
contentions, we are not persuaded that he was unfit at the time 
of his 1997 separation. Therefore, we agree with the opinion and 
recommendation of the BCMR Medical Advisor and adopt his 
rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has 
not been the victim of an error or injustice. In view of the 
above and in the absence of 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 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 this application in 
Executive Session on 20 Feb 13, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

, Member 

, Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC-
2012-01525: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 Apr 12, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, BCMR Medical Advisor, dated 14 Dec 12. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Dec 12. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair