RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBERS:  BC-2003-03658
            INDEX CODE  110.02  108.01
            COUNSEL:  None

            HEARING DESIRED:  Yes

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His 1985 general discharge for misconduct be changed to  an  honorable
disability discharge for post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Before he was drummed out of the service by a dishonorable  commander,
his performance was outstanding. He was under a great deal of  stress,
and the PTSD caused his ulcer to resurface. He received  no  treatment
for the PTSD and lost his career and benefits.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is  at  Exhibit
A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 2 Apr 69. He served
a tour in Vietnam as an air cargo specialist from approximately 21 Sep
69 through 4 Oct 70.

During his last enlistment period, which began on 24 Nov  81,  he  was
assigned to the 4th Transportation Squadron at  Seymour  Johnson  AFB,
NC, as an air transportation supervisor.  He was promoted to technical
sergeant with a date of rank of 1 Aug 82.

The applicant’s performance reports are provided at Exhibit B.

On 27 Sep 84, the applicant failed to report for augmentee duty as the
Noncommissioned Commissioned Officer in Charge (NCOIC), Air  Passenger
Terminal, as ordered by the traffic management officer (TMO). The  TMO
requested the commander take severe action. On 5 Nov  84,  by  Summary
Court-Martial action, the applicant was found guilty of failing to  go
to his appointed place of duty on 27 Sep 84. Punishment was forfeiture
of $500.00 in pay for one month and a reduction to the grade of  staff
sergeant, which was suspended until 4 May 85.

On 2 Jul 85, the Enlisted Performance  Report  (EPR)  for  the  period
closing 23 Jun 85, was referred  to  the  applicant.  He  received  an
overall rating of 4 [old  system--highest  rating  was  9].  Evaluator
comments noted he had a negative attitude, was incapable of performing
in a supervisory position, promotion and retention were not warranted,
and rebuttal comments from the applicant were not received within  the
authorized 10 days.

On 25 Jul 85, the applicant was  convicted  by  Special  Court-Martial
(SCM) for failing  to  obey  a  superior  NCO’s  lawful  order,  being
disrespectful to the NCO by ignoring him  as  he  issued  orders,  and
pushing the NCO backwards with his hands on 14 May 85. He was  reduced
to staff sergeant, forfeited $300.00 pay per month for  three  months,
and reprimanded.

On 29 Jul 85, the applicant was notified of his  squadron  commander’s
intent  to  recommend  discharge  for  the  applicant’s   pattern   of
misconduct. In  his  notification  letter,  the  commander  cited  the
following as reasons for his action [documentation in the  applicant’s
military  record  pertaining  to  these  incidents  was   not   always
available, or legible]:

      -- The 5 Nov 84 Summary Court-Martial conviction for  misconduct
on 27 Sep 84.

      -- A 20 Dec 84 Letter of Counseling (LOC) for  poor  performance
and attitude during the month of Dec 84.

      -- A 2 Jan 85 LOC for failing to obey a lawful order  on  31 Dec
84 to discuss his on-the-job training.

      -- A 29 LOC for dereliction of duty on 25 Jan 85.

      -- A 22 Feb 85 LOC for failing to learn required daily tasks  of
Air Freight during Jan and Feb 85.

      -- A 25 Apr 85 LOC for failing to obey a lawful order to  remove
nets and cargo and place the cargo in appropriate places on 23 Apr 85.

      -- A 5 Jun 85 LOC for dereliction of  duty  in  maintaining  his
assigned work areas and latrines on 2 Jun 85.

      -- A 25 Jun 85 Letter  of  Reprimand  (LOR)  for  threatening  a
superior NCO on 14 May 85.

      -- The 25 Jul 85 SCM conviction for misconduct on 14 May 85.

The applicant acknowledged receipt and, on 29 Jul  85,  the  commander
recommended discharge, without probation and rehabilitation (P&R), for
a pattern of misconduct. The applicant  consulted  counsel,  submitted
statements, and did not waive his right to  an  appearance  before  an
administrative discharge board (ADB).

An ADB was scheduled for  8  Aug  85;  however,  on  21  Aug  85,  the
applicant offered a conditional waiver of an  ADB  contingent  on  his
receiving no less than a general discharge.

Legal  review,  on  21  Aug  85,  advised  the   convening   authority
(4th Combat  Support  Group  commander)  to  recommend  the  discharge
authority (9th Air Force commander) approve the waiver. Legal  review,
on 27 Aug 85, recommended against affording P&R under lengthy  service
provisions, found the case legally  sufficient,  and  recommended  the
applicant’s conditional waiver be accepted.  The  discharge  authority
approved the applicant’s general discharge, without P&R, on 28 Aug 85.


The approved  discharge  without  P&R  was  ordered  executed  by  the
designee of the Secretary of the Air Force (SAF) on 14 Nov 85.

On 20 Nov 85, after 16 years, 7 months and 19 days of active  service,
the applicant was discharged in the grade of  staff  sergeant  with  a
general characterization for misconduct.

The applicant filed a claim with the Department  of  Veterans  Affairs
(DVA) for service-connected disability compensation for PTSD in  2001.
However, in 2002, the DVA  denied  his  claim  because  the  traumatic
events experienced in Vietnam as reported by the applicant  could  not
be verified as  required  by  DVA  policy  when  adjudicating  service
connection for PTSD.

Available records pertaining to the applicant’s medical issues are  at
Exhibit B, and the AFBCMR Medical Consultant provides medical  details
in his advisory at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The AFBCMR Medical Consultant’s  review  of  the  applicant’s  service
records revealed no reference to participation  in  combat  or  events
similar to those described by the applicant in  DVA  records.  Service
medical records show  the  applicant  was  treated  for  peptic  ulcer
disease while in  the  service.  The  available  medical  records  are
incomplete. However, at the time of his discharge, the  applicant  did
not raise any medical or psychological issues.  The  preponderance  of
the evidence does not support a finding that, in the year  leading  up
to his discharge, the applicant was suffering from mental  illness  so
severe as to render him incapable of  knowing  right  from  wrong  and
conforming his behavior to the law and Air Force regulations. Many Air
Force members experience emotional distress  and  are  diagnosed  with
mental illness, including depression and PTSD. However,  they  do  not
commit misconduct and, when they do, they  are  held  responsible  for
their behavior unless they are declared legally insane.  There  is  no
evidence the applicant experienced mental decompensation that rendered
him legally insane or would have warranted referral for evaluation  in
the disability system. Denial is recommended.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the Air  Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant on 12 May 04 for review and comment within 30 days.   As  of
this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

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. After a thorough  review  of  the
documentation pertaining to this appeal,  we  are  not  persuaded  the
applicant’s general discharge for misconduct should be upgraded to  an
honorable  medical  discharge  for  service-connected  PTSD.  In  this
regard, the  applicant  has  not  shown  that,  at  the  time  of  his
discharge, he  was  suffering  from  a  physical  or  mental  disorder
rendering  him  unfit   for   military   service   or   incapable   of
distinguishing between right and wrong.  As  noted  by  the  DVA  when
adjudicating his claim  for  service-connected  PTSD,  the  events  as
related by the applicant cannot  be  correlated  or  verified  by  his
records. Further, the AFBCMR Medical Consultant appropriately  reminds
us that many military members experience emotional  distress  and  are
diagnosed with mental illness, including depression and PTSD. However,
most do  not  commit  misconduct  and,  if  they  do,  they  are  held
responsible for their actions unless found legally insane. We find  it
regrettable the applicant’s own  infractions  prematurely  ended  what
apparently was once a creditable military career, despite  efforts  by
his supervisors and commander  to  salvage  it.  Other  than  his  own
allegations, the applicant submits no evidence showing he should  have
been medically discharged rather than administratively  separated  for
misconduct.  We  therefore  agree  with   the   Medical   Consultant’s
recommendations and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our
decision that the applicant has not sustained
his burden of having suffered either an error or an injustice. In view
of the above and absent persuasive evidence to the contrary,  we  find
no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought.

4.    The applicant’s case is adequately documented  and  it  has  not
been shown that a personal appearance with  or  without  counsel  will
materially  add  to  our  understanding  of  the  issue(s)   involved.
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 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 29 June 2004 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                       Ms. Cathlynn B. Sparks, Panel Chair
                       Ms. Martha J. Evans, Member
                       Mr. James E. Short, Member

The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2003-03658 was considered:

  Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 Mar 04, w/atchs.
  Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
  Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, dated 19 Apr 04.
  Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 May 04.




                                   CATHLYNN B. SPARKS
                                   Panel Chair