RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2021-02713

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL: NONE	 

 	HEARING REQUESTED: NO	 

APPLICANT’S REQUEST

His retirement for physical disability be in the rank of major (O-4), instead of captain (O-3).  

APPLICANT’S CONTENTIONS

He does not consider his lack of earlier promotion to have been an intentional injustice.  Rather, the injustice was due to his mental illness clouding his judgment.  In the spring of 1998, he erroneously requested not to be promoted to protest officer service commitments as overly constraining the volunteer spirit.  Upon the end of his service on the temporary disability retired list (TDRL), he told the board he wanted to remain as an officer.   

The quality of his service while on active duty and the quality of his civic advocacy performed as a retiree deserve a weightier rank than of captain.  He provides documentation of his promotion recommendation form (PRF) in 1998 and samples of his writing.  He is self-employed as his lengthy depression still makes him unreliable for regular scheduled work.  

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant is a retired Air Force captain (O-3).

The applicant provides a letter from his wing commander (WG/CC) dated 6 Mar 98 with AF Form 709, Promotion Recommendation Form, showing he received a “Definitely Promote” recommendation for the CY98B Major Central Selection Board (CSB) (P0498B) board, which was scheduled to convene on 6 Apr 98.  

On 28 Jun 98, a medical evaluation board (MEB) convened for his diagnosis of bipolar 1 disorder, single manic episode, severe with psychotic features (mood congruent).  The attached medical note dated 4 Apr 98 shows the applicant was admitted to the psychiatric ward at the Naval Hospital.  On 1 Apr 98, he sent three emails to an Air Force four-star general regarding the status of the Air Force and his promotion to major.  The emails were erratic and nonsensical and were of deep concern to his chain of command.  It was also noted he had be rewiring his telephone line in his dorm room and had endorsed experiencing a religious awakening.  The applicant endorsed an increase in the speed of his thinking and indicated his thoughts were racing.  He denied any suicidal ideation but acknowledged his statements in his emails may have been construed as suicidal thoughts.  
	
Per Special Order XXXX, the applicant was discharged from active duty on 18 Dec 98 and placed on the TDRL effective 19 Dec 98 with a compensable disability rating of 30 percent.  His highest grade held on active duty reflects as captain.  

On 14 Jun 00, the applicant concurred with the findings and recommendations of the formal physical evaluation board (FPEB) he be removed from the TDRL and be permanently retired with a 50 percent compensable rating for physical disability.  

Per Special Order XXXX dated 28 Jun 00, the applicant was removed from the TDRL effective 18 Jul 00 and retired in the rank of captain with a compensable percentage of 50 percent for physical disability.  He was credited with 11 years, 6 months and 22 days of active duty service for retirement.  His highest grade held on active duty reflects as captain.  

The applicant’s promotion status is unknown as promotion board documentation from this time period was accomplished via paper copy only.  Per the Air Force Personnel Center (APFC), the records have since been placed in staging in accordance AFI 33-322, Records Management and Information Governance Program. 

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

APPLICABLE AUTHORITY/GUIDANCE

Per 10 U.S.C. § 624, the report of a selection board is approved by the President, the Secretary of the Military Department concerned shall place the names of all officers approved for promotion within a competitive category on the promotion list.  This Board, which serves on behalf of the Secretary of the Air Force, in the correction of military records, is without authority to appoint or directly promote officers.  

AFI 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), Paragraph 3.4.4, the applicant has the burden of providing evidence in support of their claim if they are the victim of an error or injustice.  

AIR FORCE EVALUATION

The AFRBA Psychological Advisor finds insufficient evidence to support the applicant’s request from a mental health perspective.  Liberal consideration is not applied for a promotion since liberal consideration is applicable to discharge upgrades and the applicant’s request is not related to this matter.  The applicant did not dispute his discharge.

A review of his records show he was evaluated at the mental health clinic on 3 Apr 98 after exhibiting erratic behaviors over the past several days.  He was noted to have sent an email to an Air Force four-star general regarding the status of his promotion to major on 1 Apr 98.  The emails were found to be erratic and nonsensical and he was admitted to inpatient psychiatric hospitalization and was hospitalized for several weeks, until on or about 27 Apr 98.  He received a diagnosis of bipolar disorder, single manic episode, severe with psychotic features.  On 28 Jun 98, the MEB referred him to the physical evaluation (PEB).  The informal PEB (IPEB), formal PEB (FPEB) and the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) found his mental health condition as unfitting for continued military service. 

There were no records in his military file reflecting when he was officially selected for promotion and when he declined his promotion to major.  It is plausible his judgment was impaired when he supposedly declined his promotion to major.  However, this is speculative as there are no records proclaiming he was selected for promotion or when he formally declined his promotion.  The applicant submitted records stating he was recommended for promotion but was not on the official announcement.  Due to his serious mental health condition at the time, his recommendation and selection for promotion may have been suspended or voided.  The Psychological Advisor defers addressing his promotion and declination of promotion.    

The complete advisory opinion is at Exhibit C.	

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION

The Board sent a copy of the advisory opinion to the applicant on 11 May 22 for comment (Exhibit D), but has received no response.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION

1.  The application was not 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 applicant contends the quality of his active duty and post-service accomplishments warrant retirement in a higher grade than captain; however, the Board finds his assertion insufficient to change his retired grade.  While the evidence indicates the applicant was considered for promotion by the CY98 Major CSB, which convened on 6 Apr 98, there is no evidence to show his select or nonselect status. The applicant also states he declined promotion to major.  Moreover, his TDRL order dated 2 Nov 98 and retirement order dated 28 Jun 00 reflect his highest grade held on active duty as captain.  The Board also concurs with the rationale and recommendation of the AFBCMR Psychological Advisor that the applicant did not dispute his discharge; accordingly liberal consideration does not apply to the case.  It has been more than 24 years since the CSB convened and more than 23 years since his discharge and the applicant has not provided any evidence he was selected for and promoted to the rank of major while on active duty.  The Board also notes the applicant did not file the application within three years of discovering the alleged error or injustice, as required by Section 1552 of Title 10, United States Code, and Air Force Instruction 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR).  The Board does not find it in the interest of justice to waive the three-year filing requirement.  Therefore, the Board finds the application untimely and recommends against correcting the applicant’s records.

RECOMMENDATION

The Board recommends informing the applicant the application was not timely filed; it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the delay; 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-2021-02713 in Executive Session on 30 Jun 22:

 , Panel Chair
 , Panel Member
 , Panel Member

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

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 25 Jul 21.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Advisory Opinion, Psychological Advisor, dated 24 Feb 22.  
Exhibit D:	Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBC to Applicant, dated 11 May 22.

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