AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

IN THE MATTER OF: 

DOCKET NUMBER:  96-03179 
COUNSEL:  NONE 
HEARING DESIRED:  YES 

J 

APPLICANT REOUESTS THAT: 
His  honorable  discharge  be  changed  to  reflect  a  medical 
discharge. 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
He was  injured while on active duty.  He was hospitalized at a 
number of Army Hospitals and has been permanently disabled, due 
totally to service connected injuries he received. 
Applicant's submission is attached at Exhibit A. 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 
Applicant submitted an application for correction of his records, 
undated, which was received by SAF/MIBR, Randolph Air Force Base, 
Texas  on  28  October  1996, 
At  that  time  the  applicant  was 
represented by  counsel.  On  24  June  1997,  applicant's  counsel 
requested  that  the  application  be  withdrawn  without  prejudice 
until  such time he and the applicant were able to proceed with 
additional documentation.  On 3  July 1997,  the AFBCMR  informed 
counsel that the case was withdrawn and that he may request the 
case be reopened at a later date. 
On  12  March  1998,  applicant,  through  the  office  of  Senator 
is  formally  requesting  that  his  case  be 
reopened. 
It  appears that  applicant's military  records were  destroyed by 
fire  at  the  National  Personnel  Records  Center,  St.  Louis, 
Missouri in 1973, 
Available records reflect that applicant enlisted in the Army Air 
Corps  on  5  October  1942  in  the  grade  of  private.  He  was 
continuously  hospitalized  from  28  November  1942  until  his 
discharge on 23 May 1943. 

The  additional  relevant  facts pertaining  to  this  application, 
extracted from the applicant's available military personnel and 
medical  records,  are  contained  in  the  letter, dated  30  April 
1997, prepared by the Chief, Medical Consultant, BCMR, who is the 
appropriate  office  of  the  Air  Force  Office  of  Primary 
Responsibility  (OPR)  Accordingly, there  is no need  to recite 
these facts in this Record of Proceedings. 
The  applicant  was  administratively discharged  on  23  May  1943, 
with  an  honorable  discharge,  under  the  provisions  of  Army 
Regulation  (AR)  615-360  with  a  Certificate  for  Disability 
Discharge (CDD).  He served 7 months and 19 days on active duty. 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
The Chief, Medical Consultant, BCMR  states that the evidence of 
record and medical examinations prior to separation indicate the 
applicant  was  not  fit  and  was  medically  disqualified  for 
continued  military  service. 
The  preponderance  of  evidence 
indicates the applicant was sufcering from a psychoneurosis and 
was certified to the Veterans Administration with a Certificate 
of Disability Discharge.  Regardless of the cause of applicant's 
neurologic  symptoms  and  findings,  he  was  not  eligible  for 
disability  retirement  from  the  Army  Air  Corps,  since  laws  in 
effect  at  that  time  specifically  denied  disability  retirement 
eligibility for enlisted personnel who had fewer than 20 years of 
active military  service.  Reasons  for  discharge  and  discharge 
proceedings  are  well  documented  in  the  records.  Action  and 
disposition in this case are proper and reflect compliance with 
Air Force/Army directives which implement the law.  Evidence of 
record establishes beyond all reasonable doubt that the applicant 
was handled appropriate to regulations and medical knowledge then 
in effect, that  the  reason for his  separation was proper, and 
that no error or injustice occurred in this case.  The Medical 
Consultant  is of  the  opinion that no  change in the  records is 
warranted and the application should be denied. 
A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant 
on 31 March  1998  for review and  response within  30  days.  The 
applicant did submit a letter, dated 13 April 1998 stating that 
all correspondence is to go to the office of  Senator Edward M. 
Kennedy.  (Exhibit E) 

2 

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 

The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing 

1. 
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 probable error or injustice.  After 
a  thorough  review  of  the  evidence  of  record  and  applicant I  s 
submission, we  are  not  persuaded  that  his  records  should  be 
corrected  to  reflect  a  medical  discharge  or  retirement.  His 
contentions  are  duly  noted;  however,  we  do  not  find  these 
uncorroborated  assertions,  in  and  by  themselves,  sufficiently 
persuasive to override the rationale provided by  the Air Force. 
As stated by the BCMR Medical Consultant, the evidence of record 
and  medical  examinations  prior  to  the  applicant's  separation, 
indicate  he  was  not  fit  and  was  medically  disqualified  for 
continued  military  service.  The  psychoneurosis  the  applicant 
suffered  was  certified  to  the  Veterans  Administration  with  a 
Certificate of Disability Discha-rge. However, the applicant was 
not  eligible  for disability retirement since laws in effect  at 
that time denied disability retirement for enlisted personnel who 
had fewer than 20  years of active military service.  We therefore 
agree with  the  recommendations of  the Air  Force  and  adopt  the 
rationale  expressed  as  the  basis  for  our  decision  that  the 
applicant has failed to sustain his burden that he has suffered 
either  an  error  or  an  injustice. 
Therefore,  we  find  no 
compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought. 
4.  The documentation provided with this case was sufficient to 
give the Board a clear understanding of the issues involved and a 
personal  appearance,  with  or  without  counsel, would  not  have 
materially added to that understanding.  Therefore, the request 
for a hearing is not favorably considered. 

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: 
The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence presented  did  not 
demonstrate  the  existence  of  probable  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 this application in 
Executive Session on 5 November 1998, under the provisions of AFI 
36-2603. 

3 

Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Panel Chair 
Mr. Edward H. Parker, Member 
Ms. Patricia A. Vestal, Member 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, undated, w/atchs. 
Exhibit B.  Applicant's Available Master Personnel Records. 
Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 30 Apr 9 7 .  
Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 31 Mar 9 8 .  
Exhibit E.  Applicant's Letter, dated 13 Apr 9 8 .  

Panel Chair 

4