RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-00022
            INDEX NUMBER:  108.00; 131.00
      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  None

      XXXXXXX    HEARING DESIRED:  Yes


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  3 Jul 06


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

It appears the applicant is questioning his rank at the time  of  his
discharge and believes he is owed backpay.  He also  requests  he  be
granted a medical discharge.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He should have been medically discharged.  In support of his  appeal,
applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant entered active duty on 30 Jul 65 and was promoted up to
the grade of airman first class (E-3).  On 20 Apr 68, the applicant’s
commander notified him he was initiating discharge action against him
under the provisions AFM  39-12,  paragraph  2-4(b),  “Conditions  of
Unsuitability,”  “Personality  Disorder.”   The   reasons   for   the
commander’s action were:

        a.  The medical  opinion  that  the  applicant  had  a  long-
standing character and behavior disorder  specifically  diagnosed  as
passive aggressive personality manifested by insubordination, failure
to repair, and intemperate use of alcohol.   It  was  further  stated
that  counseling  guidance,  disciplinary  action,  and   psychiatric
treatment could  not  be  reasonably  expected  to  rehabilitate  the
applicant for further military duty.

        b.  Applicant was fined $60.00 by civil authorities and given
a letter of reprimand by his commander for disturbing the  peace  and
resisting arrest.

        c.  Applicant received  an  Article  15  on  29  Nov  66  for
disobeying  a  direct  order.   Punishment  consisted  of   14   days
restriction and 14 days extra duty.

        d.  Applicant received an Article 15 on 19 Mar 68  for  drunk
and disorderly  conduct,  using  obscene  and  provoking  speech  and
gestures towards a superior officer and on-duty  security  policemen.
Punishment consisted of  forfeiture  of  $72.00  per  month  for  two
months, 30 days additional duty, and a suspended reduction to  airman
basic.

        e.  Suspended reduction to airman basic vacated on 3  Apr  68
due to failure to repair.

        f.  Received an Article 15 on 4 Apr 68 for failure to repair.
 Punishment consisted of restriction to Base for a period of 30 days.

The  commander  recommended  the  applicant  receive   an   honorable
discharge.  The applicant acknowledged receipt on 20 Apr  68.   On  3
May 68, an evaluation officer interviewed the applicant and explained
the nature of the discharge action being taken.  On   3 May  68,  the
applicant signed a statement certifying he had been  interviewed  and
counseled regarding the discharge action  and  waived  his  right  to
submit a rebuttal.  On 11 May 68, the  Base  Commander  directed  the
applicant  be  discharged  and  furnished  an   honorable   discharge
certificate.  The applicant was discharged on 15 May 68 with  service
characterized as honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial of the applicant’s  request.   Based  on
documentation in the applicant’s master personnel file, his discharge
was consistent with the procedural and  substantive  requirements  of
the discharge regulation.  The applicant did not submit any  evidence
or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in  the  discharge
processing.  Applicant provided no facts warranting a change  to  his
discharge.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPPWB  addressed  the  issue  of  the  applicant’s  “rank   and
backpay.”  They recommend no corrections be made to  the  applicant’s
grade at the time of his discharge  as  no  error  or  injustice  was
discovered.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to  the  applicant
on 29 Apr 05 for review and comment  within  30  days.   To  date,  a
response has not been received.

_________________________________________________________________

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.   We  took  notice  of  the
applicant's complete submission in judging the merits  of  the  case;
however, we agree with the opinions and recommendations  of  the  Air
Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale  as
the basis for our conclusion that the  applicant  has  not  been  the
victim of an error  or  injustice.   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   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 Docket Number  BC-2005-
00022 in Executive Session on 15 June 2005, under the  provisions  of
AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
      Ms. Martha A. Maust, Member
      Mr. Wallace F. Beard, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 27 Jan 05, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPPRS , dated 29 Mar 05.
    Exhibit D.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 19 Apr 05.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Apr 05.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Chair