RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2019-03441

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL: NONE

	HEARING REQUESTED: YES

APPLICANT’S REQUEST

His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT’S CONTENTIONS

His record indicated that he had willful misconduct of tardiness of under 5 minutes, wearing issued clothing of improper length, and multiple reports of PT failure on the run section that was attributed to his medical disability that he received after getting out of the service, which was the cause of putting him on the control roster.  Placement on the control roster was unfair, in that every minor discrepancy such as 2 minutes late had to be documented, even though he was normally the first or second one in his squadron to arrive on location.  This was inconsistent with non-control roster members and caused him to be discharged one month prior to his expected separation date.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant is a former senior airman (E-4) who served in the Regular Air Force.

On 18 Mar 13, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intent to recommend that he be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFPD 36-32, Military Retirements and Separations and AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen for minor disciplinary infractions.  The commander recommended the applicant’s discharge be characterized as under honorable conditions (general).

On 18 Mar 13, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the discharge notification and after consulting with counsel, on 21 Mar 19, he provided a statement for the discharge authority’s consideration requesting that he be separated with an honorable discharge.

On 22 Mar 13, the staff judge advocate found the discharge action legally sufficient and recommended the applicant be separated with an under honorable conditions (general) discharge characterization.  The discharge authority approved the recommendation on 25 Mar 13.

On 3 Apr 13, the applicant was discharged with an under honorable conditions (general) character of service.  His narrative reason for separation is misconduct (minor infractions) and he was credited with 3 years, 10 months, and 15 days of active service.

On 1 Jan 14, the applicant appealed to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) to upgrade his discharge to honorable.

On 27 Mar 14, the AFDRB concluded that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority and the applicant was provided full administrative due process.  The Board further concluded that no legal or equitable basis for upgrade of the discharge existed and determined the discharge should remain unchanged.

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

POST-SERVICE INFORMATION

On 30 Jul 19, the Board sent the applicant a request for post-service information, including a standard criminal history report from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI); however, he has not replied (Exhibit C).

AIR FORCE EVALUATION

AFPC/DP2STM recommends denying the application.  Based on review of the applicant’s request and the master personnel record, there is no error or injustice with the discharge processing.  The record shows the commander provided the discharge authority enough evidence to warrant separation and the service characterization.  The discharge authority concluded that the significant negative aspects of the applicant’s conduct outweighed any positive aspects of the applicant’s brief military service.

The complete advisory opinion is at Exhibit D.

The BCMR Medical Advisor recommends denying the application.  The Medical Advisor opines that the applicant has not met the burden of proof of an error or injustice that warrants the desired change of the record.  The Medical Advisor concedes that pulmonary disease could have influenced the applicant’s inability to pass the run portion of his Fitness Assessments (FA).  However, his treating physicians did not find this to be the case.  Therefore, the Medical Advisor opines, even had the applicant been found unfit due to a respiratory disorder, such as asthma, or his FA failures were attributed to such a disorder, he would have still been confronted with an approved involuntary administrative separation.  Thus, at best his case would have warranted a “dual-action” review by the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC).  Finding no causal or mitigating relations between the applicant’s disciplinary infractions and a disqualifying medical condition, the Medical Advisor opines that the SAFPC would have executed the approved administrative discharge and set aside the medical discharge.

The complete advisory opinion is at Exhibit E.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION

The Board sent copies of the advisory opinions to the applicant on 2 Oct 19 for comment (Exhibit F), but has received no response.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION

1.  The application was timely filed.

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

3.  After reviewing all Exhibits, the Board concludes the applicant is not the victim of an error or injustice.  The Board concurs with the rationale and recommendation of AFPC/DP2STM and the BCMR Medical Advisor and finds a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions.  Therefore, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s record.

4.  The applicant has not shown a personal appearance, with or without counsel, would materially add to the Board’s understanding of the issues involved.

RECOMMENDATION

The Board recommends informing the applicant the evidence did not demonstrate material error or injustice, and the Board will reconsider the application only upon receipt of relevant evidence not already presented.

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-2019-03441 in Executive Session on 20 Feb 20:

, Panel Chair
, Panel Member
, Panel Member

All members voted against correcting the record.  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, dated 28 May 19.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 30 Jul 19.
Exhibit D:	Advisory opinion, AFPC/DP2STM, dated 31 Jul 19.
Exhibit E:	Advisory opinion, BCMR Medical Advisor, dated 27 Sep 19.
Exhibit F:	Notification of advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 2 Oct 19.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings, pertaining to Docket Number BC-2019-03441, as required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.