RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02923 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His discharge be corrected to show that he was placed on the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL). _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was discharged due to alcohol abuse; however, it was his method of self-medication for his anxiety condition. His anxiety condition was later determined to be service aggravated and rated 30 percent disabling by the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA). In support of the request, the applicant provides copies of a letter from the Indiana American Legion, his AF Form 356, Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) Findings and Recommended Disposition of USAF Physical Evaluation Board; and a University of Manitoba Research Summary website extract. The applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 27 Jan 09, the applicant entered the Regular Air Force. On 29 Mar 10, the applicant was notified of pending discharge action. Specifically, the commander cited conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline as the basis for discharge. The applicant’s misconduct included two Articles 15, Record of Nonjudicial Punishment Proceedings, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for failure to refrain from drinking alcohol while under the age of 21 years and for physically controlling a vehicle while his blood alcohol concentration was .10, and a Letter of Reprimand for disobeying a direct order by driving on base with suspended driving privileges. On 7 Apr 10, the applicant was referred to the IPEB for generalized anxiety disorder (existed prior to service), aggravated by the service with panic disorder with agoraphobia. The IPEB recommended placement on the TDRL with a disability rating of 30 percent. On 19 Apr 10, the applicant concurred with the findings of the IPEB. However, since the applicant had a final recommendation of unfit and an administrative action pending, his case was processed as a dual action case and forwarded to the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) for a final determination. On 17 May 10, and after reviewing all the facts and circumstances of the case, SAFPC directed discharge and noted that while the applicant’s condition may have been an aggravator of his stress, it did not form the basis of his choices to engage in misconduct. Further, SAFPC opined that the applicant’s symptoms reflected a non-service related natural progression of his pre-existing condition. On 28 May 10, the applicant was discharged with a UOTHC discharge and with a narrative reason for separation of Misconduct-Other. He is credited with one year, four months, and two days of active service. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial. DPSOS states the applicant’s narrative reason for separation, to include the characterization of service, was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge instruction and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. Further, the applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any error or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing. He provided no facts warranting an upgrade to his discharge characterization. The complete DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPSD recommends denial. DPSD states the preponderance of evidence reflects that no error or injustice occurred during the disability process or at the time of the applicant’s separation. The complete DPSD evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 25 Mar 11 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). As of this date, this office has not received a response. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial. The BCMR Medical Consultant concedes alcohol use commonly accompanies a disturbance of mood, e.g., anxiety and/or depression, either as a precipitating cause or may result in its usage. However, the applicant was given the opportunity to comply with the full participation in treatment program, which included medications, psychotherapy, and the ADAPT program, to address his domestic, anxiety, and alcohol-related problems, yet he elected to continue to violate the law (underage drinking). The BCMR Medical Consultant is of the opinion that the applicant has not met the burden of proof of a material error or injustice that justifies the desired change of record. The complete BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit F. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 14 Jun 11 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit G). As of this date, this office has not received a response. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. 2. The application was timely filed. 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 in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis for us 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-02923 in Executive Session on 21 July 2011, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 30 June 2010, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Military Personnel Records. Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOS, Letter, dated 13 January 2011. Exhibit D. AFPC/DPSD, Letter, dated 2 February 2011. Exhibit E. SAF/MRBR, Letter, dated 25 March 2011, w/atch. Exhibit F. BCMR Medical Consultant, Letter, dated 13 May 2011. Exhibit G. SAF/MRBR, Letter, dated 14 June 2011, w/atch.