RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2017-04619

	COUNSEL: 

	HEARING: NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  His discharge Under Honorable Conditions (General) be upgraded to Honorable.

2.  His narrative for reason for separation be changed to read medical.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

During his military service, he was diagnosed with passive aggressive behavior, but was actually showing symptoms of paranoid schizophrenia.  He believes the paranoid schizophrenia was the cause of his misconduct, which led to his court-martial conviction and subsequent discharge.  If he had been properly diagnosed, the court-martial could have been avoided and he could have been honorably discharged.  The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 19 Oct 81, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force.

On 21 May 84, a special court-martial found the applicant guilty of absence without leave and willful disobedience of a superior commissioned officer.

On 22 May 84, the applicant was diagnosed with Passive Aggressive Personality.

On 1 Jun 84, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intent to recommend that he be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39-10, paragraph 5-47, for a pattern of misconduct.  The reasons for the action were as follows:  The applicant was absent without leave (AWOL) from 24 Apr 84 to 30 Apr 84; disobeyed a lawful command; and failed to go to his appointed place of duty.

On 6 Jun 84, the convening authority published Special Court-Martial Order No. 5.  The Order stated the applicant was found guilty of being AWOL and disobeying a lawful command.  He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 30 days, forfeiture of pay for one month, and reduction to the grade of Airman Basic.

On 14 Jun 84, the discharge action was found legally sufficient.

On 18 Jun 84, the discharge authority approved the recommendation for discharge.

On 2 Jul 84, the applicant received a discharge under honorable conditions (general), with a narrative reason for discharge of “Misconduct-Pattern Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order and Discipline.”  He received credit for 2 years, 7 months and 14 days of active service.

The applicant subsequently appealed to the AF Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) for an upgrade of his general discharge to honorable.  On 4 Mar 93, the AFDRB denied his appeal.

On 15 Nov 12, the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) awarded the applicant 100 percent service connection for schizophrenia, effective 7 Jun 10.  The applicant’s service treatment records (STR) for the period 23 Feb 81 through 6 Jun 84 indicate he was hospitalized with early signs of paranoid schizophrenia rather than passive aggressive personality disorder.

On 30 Jan 18, a request for post-service information and a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) background check was forwarded to the applicant (Exhibit C).  In response, the applicant provided an FBI investigative report, which revealed he had no prior arrest data at the FBI.

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

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The AFBCMR Psychiatric Consultant recommends granting the application.

The applicant’s mental health history demonstrates the manifestation of “a slow and gradual development of a variety of clinically significant signs and symptoms” that led to an eventual confirmed diagnosis of schizophrenia.  The applicant also reported that he was unable to sleep and refused to report to duty.  He was afraid to go to the doctor.  These symptoms appear to have been paranoid thinking and behavior that are consistent with schizophrenia and may have caused him to go AWOL on multiple occasions (he was only convicted for going AWOL once).  Persons diagnosed with schizophrenia commonly experience distorted perceptions and delusional thinking, often leading to poor decisions that they may not be fully aware of at the time.  Therefore, it appears there is a nexus between applicant’s early onset of paranoid schizophrenia and his misconduct while in the military that led to his discharge from service.

The complete advisory is at Exhibit E.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Board sent a copy of the Air Force evaluation to the applicant on 2 Aug 18 for comment (Exhibit F), and the applicant’s counsel replied on 29 Aug 18.    The applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit G.
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The application was not timely filed, but it is in the interest of justice to excuse the delay.

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

3.  After reviewing all Exhibits, the Board concludes the applicant has presented evidence sufficient to demonstrate an injustice regarding part, but not all, of his request.  In particular, the applicant has provided post-service medical documentation from the DVA that is consistent with the opinion of the Psychiatric Consultant in finding a nexus between the applicant’s misconduct and his mental state, however defined, at the time of separation.  The Board does not find any error in the discharge process; instead, the Board views the applicant’s mental condition at the time of separation as a mitigating factor in assessing his character of service.  Nonetheless, his mental condition did not directly terminate his service, and so the applicant’s request for a narrative reason for separation of “medical” is unwarranted.  Rather, the Board concludes the appropriate narrative reason for separation is Secretarial Authority, with its corresponding separation program designator of “JFF.”  Therefore, the Board recommends correcting the applicant’s record as indicated below.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 2 July 1984, he was discharged with an honorable character of service, with a narrative reason for separation of “Secretarial Authority” and a separation program designator of “JFF.”

However, regarding the remainder of the applicant’s request, the Board recommends the applicant be informed the evidence did not demonstrate material error or injustice and the application would only be reconsidered if supported by 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-2017-04619 in Executive Session on 20 Sep 18:

, Panel Chair
, Panel Member
, Panel Member

All members voted to correct the record in part.  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 14 Sep 17.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Letter, SAF/MRBC, w/atch, dated 30 Jan 18.
Exhibit D:	FBI Report, 14 Mar 18.
Exhibit E:	Advisory opinion, AFBCMR Psychiatric Consultant, dated 18 Jul 18.
Exhibit F:	Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 2 Aug 18.
Exhibit G:	Counsel’s Response, w/atch, dated 29 Aug 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.