ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01536 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS On 19 Mar 10, the applicant requested that his discharge be upgraded to honorable, contending that he suffered from mental illness and blood clots while on active duty. After considering all the facts and evidence in the original case, the Board denied his request on 10 Mar 11, noting there was no evidence of an error or injustice in the discharge processing. The Board also determined the evidence presented by the applicant relative to his activities since leaving the service was not sufficient to upgrade his discharge in the interest of justice on the basis of clemency. For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s original request and the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit F. By application, dated 30 Jan 12 and 6 Feb 12, the applicant requests reconsideration, contending that he should be granted the requested relief because he was insane at the time of his discharge. In support of his request for reconsideration, the applicant provides an expanded statement and a copy of correspondence from the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) relative to their 16 Jul 08 finding that he is insane. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit G. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. The applicant contends that his other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge should be upgraded to honorable because he was insane at the time of his 1980 discharge. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s complete submission, we are not convinced that corrective action is warranted. We note the applicant has presented correspondence from the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) relative to their 16 Jul 08 finding that he is insane and their determination that his service should be characterized as honorable for “VA purposes;” however, we are not convinced the determination by the DVA, some 28 years after the applicant’s discharge, renders him the victim of an error or injustice with respect to the characterization of his service in 1980. In this respect, we note the DVA, operating under Title 38, United States Code (USC), is empowered to determine whether or not a veteran’s service can be classified as honorable for the purpose of bestowing DVA benefits and irrespective of the discharge authority’s original determination of service characterization. Such a finding, in and of itself, does not require us to recommending the requested relief be granted, particularly when the applicant has failed to submit any evidence relative to his condition during his service and whether or not there was a causal relationship between his purported condition and the misconduct for which he was discharged. Therefore, in the absence of such evidence, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief requested 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-2010-01536 in Executive Session on 13 Dec 12, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit F. Record of Proceedings, dated 1 Apr 11, w/atchs. Exhibit G. DD Forms 149, dated 30 Jan 12 and 6 Feb 12, w/atchs.