RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00377

			COUNSEL:  NONE

			HEARING DESIRED:  NO 


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge be upgraded 
to Honorable.

His type of discharge reflect a disability rating.

He receive the appropriate level of compensation from date of 
separation.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was diagnosed with many ailments while serving in the Air 
Force; which have only gotten worse with age.  These injuries 
were sustained while enlisted with the United States Air Force 
Honor Guard and they were never fully evaluated. 

In support of the applicant’s request, he submits a letter 
detailing multiple injuries which he listed on his DD Form 2697, 
Report of Medical Assessment, dated 7 Jan 05 while processing 
for separation.  His injuries include shoulder pain, joint 
arthritis with decreased mobility, bilateral knee pain, 
excessive scare tissue and a contracted sexually transmitted 
disease.

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 19 Aug 
03.

On 18 May 04, the applicant received an Article 15, Nonjudicial 
Punishment, for violating Article 134, wrongfully possessing a 
military identification card.  He was reduced in grade to airman 
(suspended) and restricted to the limits of base for 14 days.  
On 2 Jun 04, the applicant received a Letter of Reprimand for 
failing to go a violation of Article 91 of the Unformed Code of 
Military Justice (UCMJ).  

On 3 Jun 04, the applicant received a second Letter of Reprimand 
for lying a violation of Article 91 of the UCMJ.  

On 3 Jun 04, the applicant received a third Letter of Reprimand 
for failing to go a violation of Article 91 of the UCMJ. 

On 26 Jul 04, the applicant received a fourth Letter of 
Reprimand for failure to go a violation of Article 91 of the 
UCMJ.    

On 27 Jul 04 the applicant’s commander determined he violated 
the conditions of his suspension to which he left the 
restrictions of base.  He thereby vacated his suspended 
reduction in rank.  

On 25 Nov 04, the applicant received his fifth Letter of 
Reprimand for lying a violation of Article 91 of the UCMJ.  

On 21 Dec 04, the applicant received his sixth Letter of 
Reprimand for insubordination, fraud and lying in violation of 
Articles 91, 132, and 134 of the UCMJ. 

On 6 Jan 05, the applicant was notified his commander’s intended 
to discharge him for minor disciplinary infractions in 
accordance with AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of 
Airmen, Chapter 5, paragraph 5.49. 

On 25 Jan 05, the discharge authority approved the commander’s 
recommendation and directed a General (Under Honorable 
Conditions) discharge.  Probation and rehabilitation was not 
deemed appropriate in this case.

On 28 Jan 05, the applicant was furnished a General (Under 
Honorable Conditions) discharge, and was credited with 1 year, 5 
months, and 10 days of active service.   

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of 
primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C.    


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of 
an error or an injustice.  Based on documentation contained in 
the record the applicant was afforded several opportunities to 
overcome his deficiencies.  The applicant’s time in the Air 
Force consisted of nothing more than a series of negative 
events.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C.

BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial indicating there is no 
evidence of an error or an injustice.  The military Disability 
Evaluation System (DES), established to maintain a fit and vital 
fighting force, can 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 Medical Consultant opines the applicant 
has not met the burden of proof that warrants the desired change 
of the record.  

A complete copy of the BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at 
Exhibit D.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 7 Oct 14, the applicant responded to the Air Force 
Advisories.  He contends that after being diagnosed with 
influenza and a sexual transmitted disease he was mentally 
distraught and lost all will as if his life was over; which, 
clouded his judgment, causing him to make poor decisions.  
Additionally, if the Air Force and its staff properly assess his 
medical/mental needs his numerous infractions would have never 
happened.  He might have made a turn for the best and continued 
a very much positive career.

A complete copy of the applicant’s response is at 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 an error or injustice.  We took 
notice of the applicant’s complete submission, to include his 
rebuttal comments, in judging the merits of the case; however, 
we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force 
office of primary responsibility (OPR) and adopt its rationale 
as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the 
victim of an error of injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of 
evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting 
the requested relief.


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-2014-00377 in Executive Session on 13 Jan 15 under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 14 Jan 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 25 Jun 14.
	Exhibit D.  Memorandum, Medical Consultant, dated 15 Jul 14 
	Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Sep 14.
	Exhibit F.  Applicant’s letter, dated 7 Oct 14.