RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

 AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00031 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

Her under other than honorable discharge be upgraded to 
honorable. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

She was discharged for Passive Aggressive Disorder. Her 
behavior was erratic and impulsive but that was due to a 
chemical imbalance. She has recently been diagnosed as Bi-Polar 
with Impulse Control Disorder. She should have been treated for 
her illness instead of punished. She has been seeking treatment 
for the past 30 years and is finally on medication that is 
making her better. 

 

In support of her appeal, the applicant provides a copy of her 
psychiatric evaluation. 

 

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

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 27 July 1978. 

 

On 26 February 1979 the applicant was diagnosed with Passive-
Aggressive Personality. Her prognosis for continued military 
service was poor and it was recommended she be administratively 
separated from the Air Force. 

 

Charges were preferred against the applicant on 13 April 1979 
for attempting to procure fraudulent separation, making a false 
official statement to laboratory personnel and making a false 
official statement to a non-commissioned officer, in violation 
of Articles 80, 81, and 107 of the Uniform Code of Military 
Justice. On 20 April 1979, through her defense counsel; she 
submitted a request for discharge for the good of the service, 


in lieu of a court-martial. On 23 April 1979, her commander 
recommended her request be approved stating her duty performance 
had been below Air Force standards. Her request was approved on 
25 April 1979, and she was discharged from the Air Force with an 
under other than honorable discharge, under the provisions of 
Air Force Manual 39-12, Separation for Unsuitability, 
Misconduct, Resignation, or Request for Discharge for the Good 
of the Service and Procedures for the Rehabilitation Program. 
She was credited with serving 1 year, 1 month and 16 days on 
active duty. 

 

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation, Clarksburg, West Virginia provided a copy of an 
investigation report (Exhibit C). 

 

On 14 June 2011, the FBI investigation and a request for post-
service information were forwarded to the applicant for response 
within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received 
by this office (Exhibit D). 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

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; however, we find no evidence of an error or injustice 
that occurred during the discharge process. Based on the 
available evidence of record, it appears the discharge was 
consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge 
regulation and within the commander's discretionary authority. 
The applicant has provided no evidence, which would lead us to 
believe the characterization of the service was contrary to the 
provisions of the governing regulation, or unduly harsh. We 
considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, 
there was no evidence submitted to compel us to recommend 
granting the relief sought on that basis. Therefore, in the 
absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis upon which 
to recommend granting the relief sought. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

 

 

 

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 2011-00031 in Executive Session on 7 July 2011, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 

  Panel Chair 

  Member 

  Member 

 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 26 Jan 11. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. FBI Investigative Report. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 14 Jun 11. 

  
 

 Panel Chair