RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-02150
                                       INDEX CODE:  110.02
      XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX                   COUNSEL:  Mr. Sanford Rader

      XXXXXXXXXX                        HEARING DESIRED:  Yes

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  13 January 2006

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general discharge be upgraded to honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His misconduct was caused  by  Post  Traumatic  Distress  arising  from  his
military service which only became apparent in 2002.  His  military  counsel
pressured him into accepting a general discharge.

In support of his application, he provides a personal statement, letters  of
commendation, medical reports, Social Security Administration decision,  and
disability award and rehabilitation plan from  the  Department  of  Veterans
Affairs (DVA).  The applicant’s complete submission,  with  attachments,  is
at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 17 June 1969, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force at the  age
of 20 in the grade of airman basic (E-1) for a period  of  four  years.   He
was trained as a Veterinary Specialist.   The  applicant  was  progressively
promoted to the grade of airman first class (E-3) effective and with a  date
of rank of 1 January 1970.  He received  one  performance  report  from  the
period 17 June 1969 through 1 July 1970, with an overall rating of 7.

On 9 February 1970, the applicant was picked up  by  local  authorities  for
indecent  exposure  after  exposing  himself  to  two  women  at   a   local
laundromat.   The  applicant  was  released  to  military  authorities   for
disposition; however, no charges were filed  by  the  complainants.   On  12
August 1970, the applicant was arrested for  lewd  and  lascivious  acts  in
front of a minor.  On the  same  day,  the  applicant  was  recommended  for
removal from On-the-Job training due to failure of  the  course  examination
of his Career Development Course twice.

As a result of a psychiatric evaluation, the applicant was diagnosed with  a
character  and  behavior  disorder  of  sexual   deviation   manifested   by
exhibitionism.  On 10 September 1970, his commander notified  the  applicant
of his intent to recommend the applicant for a general discharge  under  AFM
39-12, Chapter 2, Section A, without  probation  or  rehabilitation.   On  2
October 1970, after acknowledging receipt  of  his  commander’s  intent  and
being interviewed by an appointed evaluation officer, the  applicant  waived
his rights to consult with legal  counsel,  submit  statements  in  his  own
behalf, and to request consideration for the  probation  and  rehabilitation
program.  On 8 October  1970,  the  staff  judge  advocate  found  the  file
legally sufficient and recommended a  general  discharge  under  AFM  39-12,
Chapter 2, Section A, for a character and behavior disorder.  On 13  October
1970,  the  discharge  authority  approved  the  applicant’s  discharge   as
recommended without probation.

The applicant was discharged  effective  20  October  1970  with  a  general
(under honorable conditions) characterization of  service.   He  served  one
year, four months and four days on active duty.

On 26 July 2000, the Air Force Board  for  Correction  of  Military  Records
(AFBCMR) considered and disapproved the applicant’s request  to  change  his
discharge to a disability separation (Exhibit F).

On 21 June 2001, the Social Security Administration  granted  the  applicant
disability benefits for mental illness.  On 30 April 2003, the  DVA  granted
the applicant service connection for  Obsessive  Compulsive  Disorder  rated
100% effective 23 June 1999.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial.  The BCMR Medical  Consultant
is of the opinion  that  the  applicant’s  condition  did  not  represent  a
condition  that  warranted  evaluation  through  the  Air  Force  disability
evaluation system.  In addition,  his  discharge  was  consistent  with  his
diagnosis  and  the  characterization  of  his  service   was   within   the
discretionary authority of his commander.   The  BCMR  Medical  consultant’s
evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant’s counsel submits that the BCMR Medical Consultant’s opinion
is nothing more than a rubber stamp of the previous military  findings  of
some 35 years ago and  should  not  be  persuasive  with  respect  to  his
client’s application.  It appears the BCMR Medical Consultant  disregarded
the fact that the Social Security’s decision of 21 June 2001 declared  the
applicant was totally disabled and the  disability  award  from  the  DVA,
dated 30 April 2003.  A copy of the counsel’s rebuttal,  with  attachment,
is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

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.  The  applicant  did  not  provide
persuasive evidence showing  the  information  in  the  discharge  case  was
erroneous, his substantial rights were  violated,  or  that  his  commanders
abused their discretionary authority.  While we note the  applicant’s  claim
that his conduct was due to Post-Traumatic Stress disorder stemming  from  a
traumatic event while  serving  on  active  duty,  we  note  the  case  file
indicates he suffered from hypersexuality and a tendency to  expose  himself
since age 13.  Notwithstanding this  fact,  there  is  no  evidence  in  the
available record that  would  lead  us  to  believe  the  diagnosis  of  his
condition at that  time  was  erroneous  or  contrary  to  accepted  medical
principles, or, that his condition met the criteria for physical  disability
processing.  In the absence of such evidence, we agree with  the  assessment
of the contentions of applicant and counsel by the BCMR  Medical  Consultant
and adopt his rationale as the basis for the conclusion that  the  applicant
has  not  been  the  victim  of  an  error  or  injustice.   Therefore,  the
applicant’s request is not favorably considered.

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 issues 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 4 October 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

            Ms. B. J. White-Olson, Panel Chair
            Ms. Jean A. Reynolds, Member
            Ms. Josephine L. Davis, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with  AFBCMR
Docket No. BC-2004-02150:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 7 Jul 04, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 29 May 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Jul 05.
    Exhibit E.  Counsel’s Rebuttal, w/atch, dated 19 Aug 05.
    Exhibit F.  Record of Proceedings, dated 28 Jul 00.




                                   B. J. White-Olson
                                   Panel Chair