RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-01215

		COUNSEL:  NO

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO 


________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was unjustly discharged from the Air National Guard (ANG) due to “conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline.”  He was never given a reason for his discharge.  The real reason for his discharge was his disabilities.  While in the ANG, he sought help for his disabilities, but was never given any.  The Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) rated him as being 100 percent disabled with a service-connected disability.  

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the California Air National Guard (ANG) on 21 Apr 00.

On 21 Aug 02, the applicant’s commander requested the applicant be demobilized from his partial mobilization tour because he was unfit for his assigned duties.  His inattention to duties, non-compliance with regulations and policies, and his negative attitude towards all levels of leadership within his squadron contributed to his unacceptable performance.  

On 19 Nov 02, the applicant’s commander notified him he was recommending his discharge for “misconduct/conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline.”  The reason for this action was the applicant had demonstrated a pattern of misconduct consisting wholly or in part of misconduct more serious than that considered as substandard performance.  

On 19 Nov 02, the applicant’s commander recommended his discharge with characterization of service as general (under other than honorable conditions).  

On 4 Dec 02, the discharge authority concurred with the recommendation for discharge and the applicant was discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) character of service and a reason for discharge of “conduct prejudicial to good order” in Feb 03. 

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility, which are attached at Exhibits C and D.    

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

NGB/SGPF recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice.  There are no ANG service treatment records, line-of-duty (LOD) findings, or Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) findings to indicate the applicant is, or was eligible for, a medical discharge.  He did not submit any documentation to support his contention.  

A complete copy of the NGB/SGPF evaluation is at Exhibit C.

NGB/A1PP recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice.  The applicant provided a written statement noting his interpretation of how and why he was discharged claiming he received no help from his unit and was not given an explanation as to why he was discharged.  A1PP contacted the California ANG and received adequate historical data demonstrating the applicant received substantial information confirming he was not meeting the expectations and standards of his unit.  On 4 Mar 02, the applicant was suspended from bearing firearms and was recommended for separation shortly thereafter following numerous attempts to correct actions which caused issues/concerns within his unit.  The applicant did not go through an MEB and is not eligible for a medical discharge.  

A complete copy of the NGB/A1PP evaluation is at Exhibit D.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

He submits a personal statement describing some of the harassment he claims he endured as a member of his ANG unit (Exhibit F).

________________________________________________________________



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, to include his rebuttal response to the advisory opinion; however, we do not find the documentation presented sufficient to conclude the applicant has been the victim of an error or injustice.  We find no evidence or an error or injustice that occurred in the discharge process, and the applicant provided no documentation to support his assertion that his discharge was the result of a medical condition.  Based on the evidence of record, it appears the applicant’s general discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation in effect at the time and within the commander’s discretionary authority.  No evidence has been presented to indicate otherwise.  In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading his discharge on the basis of clemency; however, the applicant provided no character references or documentation for us to consider in determining whether his post-service accomplishments were sufficient to overcome the misconduct that formed the basis of the discharge.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we conclude that no basis exists for us 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-01215 in Executive Session on 19 Dec 13, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-01215 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 7 Mar 13, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records
Exhibit C.  Letter, NGB/SGPF, dated 1 Apr 13.
Exhibit D.  Letter, NGB/A1PP, dated 30 Apr 13.  
Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 May 13.
      Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated 20 May 13.




                                   
                                   Panel Chair