RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2002-03965
            INDEX CODES:  A40.00, 108.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general discharge be  upgraded  to  honorable;  he  be  awarded  a
disability retirement retroactive to Oct 56 for his  service-connected
injury/disability (narcolepsy); and, that he  be  authorized  punitive
damages.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His condition of narcolepsy was intentionally caused by his  poisoning
by the Air Force.   Because  of  the  heinous  nature  of  this  crime
committed against him,  he  has  suffered  permanent  and  irreparable
damages to his physical health and  economic  life  for  the  past  45
years.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provided personal  statements,
extracts from his medical records, and other documents associated with
the matter under review.

Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, are at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant's available military  personnel  records  indicate  that  he
enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 6 Jun 56 for  a  period  of  four
years.

On 17 Jun 58, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFR
39-16  (Unsuitability)  and  furnished  a  general  (under   honorable
conditions) discharge.  He was credited with 2 years and  12  days  of
active service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The  Medical  Consultant  recommended  denial.   He  stated  that  the
evidence in the record indicated that  the  applicant  had  difficulty
with sleeping in class in Oct 56, however, there were no other service
medical record entries  that  report  symptoms  of  excessive  daytime
sleepiness although the applicant alluded  to  being  disciplined  for
reporting late for  kitchen  police  (KP)  duty.   Post  service,  and
Veterans Administration (VA) rating decisions in 1958 and 1966 made no
mention  of  symptoms  or  diagnosis  of  sleep  disorder,  neurologic
disorder or mental disorder.  Sleep disorders such as  narcolepsy  are
chronic conditions, and if  noted  within  the  first  six  months  of
service are presumed to have existed prior to service.  The  applicant
presented for care for his symptoms by four months  of  service.   One
month before presenting to the clinic for sleeping in  class,  he  was
treated for gastroenteritis.  There were  no  further  record  entries
that showed  his  symptoms  persisted  or  worsened  and  the  Medical
Consultant concluded that those symptoms resolved consistent  with  an
infection (usually viral) very  common  in  trainees.   There  was  no
evidence this illness (Sep 56)  represented  poisoning  of  any  kind.
Following a viral illness, some individuals may experience a period of
fatigue of variable duration.

According to the Medical Consultant, there  was  no  evidence  in  the
medical records to support the applicant's contentions.  In his  view,
no change in the records is warranted.

A complete copy of the Medical Consultant's evaluation is  at  Exhibit
C.

AFPC/DPPD   recommended   denial   indicating   that   the   available
documentation revealed no errors or irregularities that would  justify
a change to the applicant's records.  The medical aspects of this case
were thoroughly explained in the  Medical  Consultant's  advisory  and
they agree with his review.  In their view, the  applicant  failed  to
submit any documentation  to  confirm  that  he  possessed  narcolepsy
during his  military  service  that  would  justify  the  award  of  a
disability discharge.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to applicant on  18
Apr 03 for review  and  response  (Exhibit  E).   On  7  May  03,  the
applicant requested that his appeal be temporarily withdrawn  (Exhibit
F).

Applicant reviewed the advisory  opinions  and  furnished  a  detailed
response.  In  summary,  he  indicated  that  his  records  should  be
corrected in the interest of justice.  He was severely injured with  a
permanent disability due to the intentional and malicious  conduct  of
the Air Force, that  then  proceeded  to  cruelly  perpetrate  further
injuries by a conspiracy to defraud that lasted 46  years,  now  being
carried out by the VA.

Applicant's complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit H.

Applicant provided a subsequent response, which is at Exhibit I.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing  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  error  or  injustice.   The  applicant's  complete
submission was thoroughly  reviewed  and  his  contentions  were  duly
noted.  However, we do not find  the  applicant’s  assertions  or  the
documentation  presented  sufficiently  persuasive  to  override   the
rationale provided by the Air Force offices of primary  responsibility
(OPR).  The  evidence  of  record  reflects  that  the  applicant  was
involuntarily discharged for unsuitability.  We find no evidence which
would lead  us  to  believe  that  his  administrative  discharge  was
improper or contrary to the governing directive  under  which  it  was
effected.  Therefore, in the absence of sufficient evidence  that  the
information used as a basis for his discharge was erroneous,  or  that
at the time of his involuntary separation, the applicant was unfit  to
perform the  duties  of  his  rank  and  office,  we  agree  with  the
recommendations of the OPRs and adopt their rationale as the basis for
our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain  his  burden  of
establishing that he has suffered either an  error  or  an  injustice.
Accordingly, we find no compelling basis  to  recommend  granting  the
relief sought in this application.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2002-03965 in Executive Session on 26 Aug 03, under the provisions  of
AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. John L. Robuck, Panel Chair
      Mr. Grover L. Dunn, Member
      Ms. Sharon B. Seymour, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 11 Dec 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, Medical Consultant, dated 10 Mar 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 11 Apr 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Apr 03.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, applicant, dated 7 May 03.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 23 May 03.
    Exhibit H.  Letter, applicant, dated 5 Jun 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit I.  Letter, applicant, dated 16 Jun 03.




                                   JOHN L. ROBUCK
                                   Panel Chair