ADDENDUM TO 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04087 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His records be corrected to reflect he was retired for physical 
disability, rather than administratively discharged. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

RESUME OF CASE: 

 

On 4 Aug 11, the Board considered and denied the applicant’s 
original request that his general (under honorable conditions) 
discharge to be upgraded to honorable and that his records be 
corrected to reflect he was retired for physical disability. In 
the initial case, he contended that he was released from active 
duty due to a chronic psychiatric condition that rendered him 
unable to continue to serve and therefore should have been 
provided disability benefits. After considering the facts and 
circumstances of the case, the Board concluded the discharge 
proceedings were proper and the characterization of his service 
was appropriate to the circumstances. However, while the Board 
was not convinced that he should have been afforded disability 
benefits, they determined the applicant’s character of service 
should be upgraded from general (under honorable conditions) to 
honorable based on clemency and as a matter of equity. 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 (ROP) at 
Exhibit E. 

 

In his latest submission, dated 22 Nov 11, with attachments, the 
applicant contends that his deteriorating duty performance prior 
to his discharge, combined with the fact the DVA provided him 
treatment for his condition in 1975, substantiates that he 
should have been discharged for physical disability and provided 
retired pay. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides an expanded 
statement and copies of excerpts of his military personnel 
records. 

 

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

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 

 

After again reviewing this application and the evidence provided 
in support of his appeal, we remain unconvinced the applicant 
has been a victim of an error or injustice. We have previously 
determined that his administrative discharge for unsuitability 
due to his diagnosis as having a chronic character and behavior 
disorder was proper and carried out in accordance with the 
directives under which it was effected. After a thorough review 
of the applicant’s latest submission, we remain unconvinced that 
he should have been furnished a disability discharge in lieu of 
his administrative discharge for unsuitability. While the 
Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) has, three decades since 
his service, seen fit to grant the applicant service connection 
for his schizophrenia, there is no evidence to indicate the 
applicant’s schizophrenia caused the termination of his military 
service and should have formed the basis for a referral through 
the Disability Evaluation System (DES). We note the DVA is 
authorized to offer compensation for any medical condition 
determined to be service incurred or aggravated, regardless of 
its impact upon a service member’s fitness to serve, the reason 
for separation, or the intervening period between the discharge 
and the DVA’s examination and determination. That is to say, 
any symptom or set of symptoms that can be attributed to a 
veteran’s military service, whether or not they are clinically 
significant or unfitting for service, may later be determined 
service incurred and compensation provided by the DVA. 
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 probable material error or 
injustice; 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-2010-04087 in Executive Session on 7 Aug 12, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

  

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit E. Record of Proceedings (ROP), dated 25 Aug 11, 

 w/atchs. 

 Exhibit F. DD Form 149, dated 5 Dec 11, w/atchs.