RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-03040
                       INDEX CODE:  108.00
                       COUNSEL:  None

                       HEARING DESIRED:  Yes

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to reflect he was retired.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His performance at his first base was sterling.    He  was  an  honor
graduate in flight simulators with a beautiful career ahead  of  him.
When he was assigned to another base, there was one  man  and  a  bad
performance report and, his career was over.

Applicant's complete submission, with an attachment, is  attached  at
Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The  applicant  enlisted  in  the  Regular  Air  Force   (RegAF)   on
16 December 1974, as an airman basic (AB) for a period of four years.
 He was progressively promoted to the grade of sergeant (E-4).

On 31 January 1980, the applicant was  notified  of  his  commander’s
intent to recommend him for discharge under  the  provisions  of  Air
Force Manual (AFM) 39-12, Chapter 2, Section A, paragraph 2-4b.   The
specific reason for the discharge action  was  based  on  two  Mental
Health evaluations diagnosing him as having  a  personality  disorder
that interfered with his duty performance.

In  the  recommendation  for  discharge,  the  commander  cited   the
applicant’s placement on the  Control  Roster  for  substandard  duty
performance on 20 December 1979.

The commander indicated in his recommendation  for  discharge  action
that several attempts  were  made  to  rehabilitate  the  applicant’s
behavior.  The applicant’s histrionic behavior and depression coupled
with his personality disorder continued to
interfere  with  his  duty  performance.   He   further   recommended
separating the applicant without probation and rehabilitation.

The commander advised the applicant of his  right  to  consult  legal
counsel and that legal counsel  had  been  obtained  to  assist  him;
present his case to an administrative discharge board; be represented
by legal counsel at a board hearing; submit  statements  in  his  own
behalf in addition to, or in lieu of, the board hearing; or waive the
above rights after consulting with counsel.

The applicant acknowledged receipt of  the  notification  letter  and
that military counsel was made available to  assist  him;  and  after
consulting with counsel, applicant invoked his  right  to  a  hearing
before an administrative discharge board and to submit statements  in
his own behalf.

An administrative discharge board was convened on 6 May, 2  July,  21
and 22 July 1980 and determined the  applicant  would  be  discharged
under the provisions of AFM 39-12, Chapter 2, Section A, paragraph 2-
4b from active duty in the grade of sergeant (E-4) for  unsuitability
with an honorable discharge without probation and rehabilitation.

A legal review was conducted on 8 August  1980  in  which  the  staff
judge advocate (SJA) stated  the  evidence  indicated  the  applicant
could  be  rehabilitated  through  long  term  therapy  and   careful
selection of supervisors and duty assignments.  The evidence  further
reflected the Air Force had throughout his career gone through  great
lengths to place the applicant in a work environment were he would be
able  to  perform  satisfactorily  with  little  results.   The   SJA
recommended the board’s findings and recommendation be approved.

On 18 August 1980, the applicant was honorably discharged and  issued
an honorable discharge certificate.   He  served  five  years,  eight
months, and two days of active federal military service.

The applicant submitted an earlier application for correction of  his
military records to change his narrative reason for discharge.  On 15
October 1982, the Air Force Board for Correction of Military  Records
(AFBCMR) denied the request.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR STAFF EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRRP states in accordance with Title 10 United States  Code
(USC), Section 8914, and under  the  regulations  prescribed  by  the
Secretary of the Air Force (SECAF), an enlisted  member  who  has  at
least 20 years, but less than 30 years of service computed
under 10 USC, Section 8925, may  request  retirement.   They  further
state the applicant had five years, eight  months  and  two  days  of
total active federal military service (TAFMS) and  does  not  qualify
for retirement.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR STAFF EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant  on
15 October 2004, for review  and  response.   As  of  this  date,  no
response has been received by this office.

_________________________________________________________________

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 of timely file.

3.     Insufficient  relevant  evidence   has   been   presented   to
demonstrate the existence of  an  error  or  injustice.   Applicant’s
contentions are duly noted; however, we agree with  the  opinion  and
recommendation of the Air Force and adopt its rationale as the  basis
for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an  error
or injustice.  The applicant was discharged from active  duty  for  a
personality disorder which interfered with  the  performance  of  his
duties; however, we note the applicant’s personality disorder did not
meet the requirements for him  to  be  processed  under  the  medical
disability evaluation system.  The applicant had a total of 5  years,
8 months and 2 days  active  federal  military  service  and  is  not
eligible for a retirement under the provisions of United States  Code
8914.  Based on the documentation  in  the  applicant's  records,  it
appears the processing and the characterization of the discharge were
appropriate and accomplished in accordance  with  Air  Force  policy.
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the  contrary,  we  find  no
compelling basis to recommend granting  the  relief  sought  in  this
application.

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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2004-03040  in  Executive  Session  on  8  December  2004  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Ms. Martha J. Evans, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Alan A. Blomgren, Member
                 Mr. Michael J. Novel, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 22 Sep 04, w/atch.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRRP, dated 5 Oct 04.
      Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Oct 04.




                             MARTHA J. EVANS
                             Panel Chair