RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01832 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His records be corrected to reflect: 

 

 1. His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be 
upgraded to honorable discharge or his type of separation be 
changed to “medical.” 

 

 2. His narrative reason for separation of misconduct be 
changed. 

 

 3. His reentry (RE) code of 2B (Separated with a general or 
under-other-than-honorable-conditions (UOTHC) discharge) be 
changed. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

During the time of his separation, he was undergoing medical 
health treatment and was not allowed to complete the treatment. 
He felt harassed and discriminated against. 

 

His symptoms, due to the medication “Accutane” were not taken 
into consideration when his commander vacated his Article 
15 punishment and initiated his discharge. He experienced 
multiple side effects, to include depression, while on Accutane. 
The depression continued for several years after he stopped 
taking the medication. He began mental health treatment on 5 Mar 
05. 

 

He was accused of being absent without leave (AWOL) during an 
exercise; however, the incident was dismissed by his commander. 
He was informed he could be discharged due to his lack of 
progression in training. He was accused of an infraction he did 
not commit and threatened with a court-martial. He pled guilty 
and accepted an Article 15 so that he could move on with his 
career. In Mar 05, he felt hopeless and suicidal. His chain of 
command made it impossible for him to continue his medical 
treatments due to his work schedule. His claim is based on the 
fact he was discriminated against for no reason. 

 

He feels his discharge was unjust and too harsh. The misconduct 
reference hinders his ability to acquire future federal 
employment. Since his discharge, he has completed an Associate’s 


degree and is working on his Bachelor’s degree. He would like to 
receive the GI Bill benefits that he contributed into but due to 
his discharge is unable to use. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 17 Sep 02, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force. 
On 6 Jul 05, his commander notified him that he was recommending 
his separation from the Air Force under the provisions of AFPD 
36-32, Military Retirements and Separations and AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airman, for Misconduct: A Pattern 
of Misconduct, Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order and Discipline. 
The specific reasons for the action were: Between 19 Aug 03 and 
18 May 05, the applicant received two (2) letters of counseling 
(LOC); four (4) letters of reprimand (LOR) and two (2) Article 
15s for various infractions (for a detailed review of the 
applicant’s infractions, see the Notification Memorandum, dated 
6 Jul 05, included in Exhibit B). The applicant acknowledged 
receipt of the discharge notification and waived his right to 
submit a statement in his own behalf. A review of the discharge 
case file by the Staff Judge Advocate was found legally 
sufficient. On 19 Jul 05, the discharge authority approved the 
recommended discharge. On 20 Jul 05, the applicant was issued a 
general (under honorable conditions) discharge for misconduct. 
He served 2 years, 10 months and 4 days on active duty. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

The BCMR Medical Advisor recommends denial since the applicant 
has not meet the burden to support his petition for a medical 
discharge due to the use of Accutane or any existing mental 
health condition present at the time of separation. Accutane was 
prescribed for the applicant’s skin condition in Apr 05 and 
continued on for a twenty-week cycle of therapy. His records 
indicate he experienced a good response to the medication with 
minimal side effects. Progress notes throughout the course of 
treatment indicate the absence of any mental health effects from 
the medication and documented negative entries for any 
depression, joint aches or abdominal pain. One twenty-week cycle 
of therapy was prescribed and the medication was very well 
tolerated throughout the treatment period which concluded in 
Oct 05. 

 

On or around 24 Feb 05, prior to starting Accutane, the applicant 
participated in an initial intake appointment in the Life Skills 
Support Center (LSSC). During the process, the psychologist 


documented the applicant’s comments that he wanted “to get out of 
the military” and had been referred for occupational problems. 
His intake assessment indicated an Axis I diagnosis of 
occupational problems and no medication was ever prescribed 
during his interaction with the LSSC. He was recommended for 
group and individual counseling sessions. There is no record of 
additional life skills therapy after Mar 05. The applicant 
remained world-wide qualified throughout the course of therapy 
and no profiles or duty restrictions were issued by the mental 
health provider. 

 

His Enlisted Performance Reports (EPRs) during the period 17 Sep 
02 through 16 May 04 indicate satisfactory performance for 
accomplishment of assigned duties, compliance with military 
bearing standards and on/off duty contact. However, his EPR for 
the period 17 May 04 through 22 Nov 04 indicates a significant 
decline in overall performance rating by his rater and squadron 
commander. Deficiencies were documented in conduct on/off duty, 
compliance with training requirements and inefficient performance 
of assigned duties. 

 

The Medical Advisor notes the governing instruction used in the 
applicant’s discharge, includes conduct of a nature that tends to 
disrupt order, discipline or morale within the military 
community. The type of misconduct usually involves causing 
dissent, disruption and degradation of mission effectiveness. 
The Medical Advisor opines that the applicant clearly 
demonstrated the pattern of behavior which justified 
administrative separation not due to any medical treatment or 
mental health diagnosis. 

 

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 14 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, or to change to his narrative reason for separation 
or reentry code. 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 the service was contrary to the provisions of the governing 
regulation, unduly harsh, or disproportionate to the offenses 
committed. Regarding his request to change his type of 
separation to medical, after a thorough review of the evidence of 
record and careful consideration of the applicant's contentions, 
we are not persuaded that he has been the victim of an error or 
injustice. 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. Therefore, 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 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 20 Feb 13, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

, Member 

, Member 

 


The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC-
2012-01832: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 9 Apr 12, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, BCMR Medical Advisor, dated 13 Dec 12. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Dec 12. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair