RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-04295
                                       INDEX CODE:  110.02
      XXXXXXXXXXXXXX                    COUNSEL:  NONE

      XXXXXXXXXXX                            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  16 February 2006


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general discharge be upgraded to honorable and his  records  be  changed
to reflect a different reason for discharge.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Due to a preexisting medical  condition  of  his  feet,  he  was  unable  to
perform duties required  by  his  Air  Force  Police  Squadron.   Air  Force
doctors failed to diagnose  his  medical  condition  properly  and  instead,
referred him to receive psychiatric evaluation.  Alcoholism  contributed  to
his problems in the service; however, he is sober  now  and  wishes  his  DD
Form  214,  Armed  Forces  of  the  United  States  Report  of  Transfer  or
Discharge, be changed as requested.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides  a  personal  statement,  a
copy of his  DD  Form  214,  and  medical  documentation.   The  applicant’s
complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 25 June 1963, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force at the  age
of 18 in the grade of airman basic (E-1) for a period  of  four  years.   He
was trained as an Air Policeman.  The applicant was  progressively  promoted
to the grade of airman second class (E-3) with a date of rank of  1  October
1964.

On 13 April 1965, the applicant received disciplinary actions under  Article
15, United States Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for  failure  to  obey  a
lawful order.  Details of the Article  15  are  not  available  for  review;
however, the records reflect he was demoted to the rank of airman  basic  on
13 April 1965.  The applicant was progressively promoted again to  the  rank
of airman second class (E-3) with a date of rank of 1  June  1966.   He  was
hospitalized from 7 September 1966 to 14  October  1966  for  emotional  and
behavioral  difficulties  leading  to  a  diagnosis  of   Passive-Aggressive
personality,  aggressive   type   manifested   by   insomnia,   nervousness,
alcoholism, and nightmares.   The  commander-directed  evaluation  concluded
that the  applicant’s  personality  disorder  rendered  him  unsuitable  for
continued military service and recommended administrative discharge.

On 6 January  1967,  his  commander  notified  the  applicant  that  he  was
recommending him for an honorable discharge  under  AFM  39-12,  Chapter  2,
Section A,  Paragraph  2-4b  (unsuitability),  for  character  and  behavior
disorder, specifically passive-aggressive personality, aggressive type.   On
the  same  day,  the  commander  made  a  recommendation  to  the  discharge
authority that the applicant be furnished  an  honorable  discharge  without
probation  or  rehabilitation.   On  9  January  1967,  after  acknowledging
receipt of his commander’s intent, the  applicant  chose  not  to  submit  a
rebuttal or a  statement  in  his  own  behalf.   On  11 January  1967,  the
evaluation  officer  appointed  in  the  case  recommended  the  commander’s
recommendation be approved and the applicant be separated without the  offer
of rehabilitation.  On 13 January 1967, the staff judge advocate  found  the
discharge file legally  sufficient.   On  19  January  1967,  the  discharge
authority approved the recommended separation and directed the applicant  be
discharged with an honorable discharge.  The discharge authority  noted  the
discharge  was  not  due  to  misconduct.   The  applicant   was   honorably
discharged effective 27 January 1967.  He  had  served  three  years,  seven
months and three days on active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant  is  of  the  opinion  that  no  change  in  the
applicant’s records is warranted.  The BCMR Medical  Consultant  states  the
applicant’s  records  document  a  character  and   behavior   (personality)
disorder  that  formed  the  basis  of  his  administrative  discharge   for
unsuitability.   There  is  no  evidence  the  applicant’s  flat  feet   and
hyperkeratosis syndrome, both  congenital/developmental/heredity  conditions
interfered with duty or contributed in any significant manner to the  reason
for his discharge.  At the time of his separation medical examination on  20
October 1966, his foot problem was listed as “Pes planus,  mild,  bilateral.
Since childhood, no treatment required.”  A Department of  Veterans  Affairs
(DVA) Rating Decision dated, 7 June  1993  denying  service  connection  for
foot problems noted presence of the  congenital/developmental  condition  of
flat feet (pes  planus)  and  two  in-service  episodes  of  care  for  foot
complaints  14  months  apart.   The  rating  decision  observed  the   foot
condition was non-disabling in service.

It is the BCMR Medical Consultant’s opinion that action and  disposition  in
this case were proper and equitable reflecting  compliance  with  Air  Force
directives  that  implement  the  law.   The   BCMR   Medical   Consultant’s
evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

He is dying of inoperable prostrate  cancer  and  would  like  an  honorable
discharge under normal conditions to hang on his wall before he  dies.   The
applicant’s rebuttal, with attachment, is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

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 probable error or injustice.  We note  the  applicant  requests
his discharge be upgraded from general to honorable; however,  the  evidence
of record indicates he was discharged with an honorable characterization  of
service.  In other words, he already has an honorable discharge.  In  regard
to his request to change the reason for his discharge,  the  record  clearly
shows that the applicant experienced problems  maintaining  acceptable  duty
performance standards.  Following a mental  health  evaluation,  a  military
psychologist  rendered  the  above-cited  diagnosis  and   recommended   his
separation from the service.  In our estimation, based on  the  evidence  of
record, the applicant’s separation was in the  best  interests  of  the  Air
Force and the individual.  Other than his own assertions, we  have  seen  no
evidence by the  applicant  indicating  the  information  contained  in  his
medical records and discharge case file is erroneous, he  was  not  afforded
all rights to  which  he  was  entitled,  or  his  commanders  abused  their
discretionary authority.  In view of the  foregoing  and  absent  persuasive
evidence indicating the  reports  of  the  applicant’s  symptoms  and  their
affect on his ability to perform his duties were erroneous, or  showing  the
governing  regulations  were  violated,  we  agree  with  the  opinion   and
recommendation of the AFBCMR Medical Consultant and find that the  applicant
has not sustained his burden for providing a showing of error or  injustice.
 Accordingly, his request 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 22 June 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

            Mr. Frederick R. Beaman III, Panel Chair
            Ms. B. J. White-Olson, Member
            Mr. James W. Russell III, Member

The following documentary evidence for AFBCMR  Docket  Number  BC-2003-04295
was considered:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dtd 22 Dec 03, with atchs.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dtd 16 Mar 05.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dtd 17 May 05.
      Exhibit E.  Applicant’s Rebuttal, dtd 23 May 05, with atchs.




                             FREDERICK R. BEAMAN III
                                             Panel Chair