RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2016-05050

XXXXXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL: NONE
	
	HEARING: NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His discharge service characterization of Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded to Honorable service characterization.  

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His misconduct was due to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), which was never diagnosed.  The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 19 Feb 81, the applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force.  

On 30 Oct 98, the applicant was discharged with an UOTHC service characterization.  This discharge action was based on the applicant’s pattern of misconduct and unsatisfactory duty performance in accordance with AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen.

On 11 Nov 17, a request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D).

For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B and the advisories at Exhibit C and E.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFLOA/JAJM recommends denying the application.  There is no error or injustice that tends to undermine the NJP actions he received.  While recent DoD guidance on PTSD encourages a fresh look at adverse administrative discharge actions when a member has previously unrecognized PTSD, it does not create a basis for overturning disciplinary actions whereby those involved had no knowledge or awareness of the issue when the matters were being adjudicated.  The applicant’s commander in both NJPs had the opportunity to assess the truth, relevancy, and weight of applicant’s submissions in imposing the punishment, and it does not appear that applicant raised the PTSD issue to his commander during processing of either NJP.  They encourage the BCMR to consider the advice of medical professionals in whether applicant’s petition merits relief in determining whether any form of clemency in warranted.   The complete advisory is at Exhibit C.

The BCMR Psychological Advisor recommends granting the application.  The applicant served honorably for most of his time in the Air Force.  Although there was no clear evidence of PTSD, the Psychological Advisor believes that something did happen to him in service that caused his functional and mental decompensation that his service records did not explicitly reveal.  In 2014, the Liberal Consideration Policy issued by the Department of Defense afforded the opportunity for veterans to appeal to BCMR for an upgrade consideration based on if a condition or experience may excuse or mitigate the discharge, existed or experienced during military service, and outweighs the discharge.  The policy did not explicitly state or require a confirmed or formal mental health diagnosis was needed in order to be considered for an upgrade. Thus, she opines that the applicant’s military and medical records support that his condition and experience specifically his deployments meet these criteria for an upgrade in discharge.  She recommends upgrading at least to a General Under Honorable Conditions discharge considering the holistic picture of his military and medical records.  The complete advisory is at Exhibit E.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Board sent a copies of the Air Force evaluations to the applicant on 27 Jun 18 for comment (Exhibit F), but has received no response.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The application was not timely filed. 

2.  The applicant exhausted all available avenues of non-judicial relief before applying to the Board.

3.  After thoroughly reviewing all Exhibits, it is the Board’s opinion that the applicant is not the victim of an error and injustice.  The Board concurs with the rationale and recommendation of AFLOA/JAJM and finds that a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions.  The Board did take into account the 2014 Liberal Consideration Policy issued by the Department of Defense affording the opportunity for veterans to appeal to BCMR for an upgrade consideration based on if a condition or experience may excuse or mitigate the discharge, existed or experienced during military service, and outweighs the discharge.  Regarding such, we note the BCMR Psychological Advisor recommends granting, however, we find, and the BCMR Psychological Advisor states there was no clear evidence the applicant suffered from PTSD.  The Board also notes the applicant did not file the application within three years after the alleged error or injustice was discovered, or should have been discovered, as required by Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552, and Air Force Instruction 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR).  Moreover, the applicant has offered no plausible reason for the delay in filing the application.  The Board finds the application untimely and concludes it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the delay.  Therefore, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s records.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The applicant be informed the application was not timely filed; it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the delay; and the application will only be reconsidered upon receipt of relevant evidence not already considered by the Board.

CERTIFICATION:

The following quorum of the Board, as defined in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), paragraph 1.5, considered Docket Number BC-2016-05050 in Executive Session on 7 Aug 18:

, Panel Chair 
, Panel Member
, Panel Member

All members voted not to correct the record.  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, dated 14 Dec 16.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Advisory opinion, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 6 Nov 17.
Exhibit D:	Clemency Letter, AFBCMR, sent 11 Nov 17.
Exhibit E:	Advisory opinion, AFBCMR Psychological Advisor, dated 17 May 18.
Exhibit F:	Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 27 Jun 18.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.