RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-01057
            INDEX CODE:  134.02
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  31 JUNE 2006

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Any record referring to  his  father  as  an  alcoholic  and/or  his  father
physically abusing him be expunged from his record.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The information  on  the  Consultation  Sheet  dated  January  12.  1955  is
erroneous.  His father was not an alcoholic and  was  not  abusive  to  him.
His signature was forged.

In support  of  the  application,  the  applicant  submits  a  copy  of  his
consultation sheet  and  three  (3)  support  statements.   The  applicant's
complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 5 May 1954, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force  at  the  age
of 19 in the grade of airman  basic  for  a  period  of  4  years.   He  was
progressively promoted to the rank of airman third class effective and  with
a date of rank of 19 July 1954.  The applicant received  two  character  and
efficiency ratings of “excellent” on 19 July 1954 and 16 September 1954.

In a psychiatric evaluation dated 12  January  1955,  the  acting  chief  of
neuropsychiatric services recommended  the  applicant  for  discharge.   The
examiner  rendered  a  diagnosis  of  immaturity  with   symptomatic   habit
reaction, chronic, severe; manifested by stuttering.   The  examiner  stated
that treatment for his condition was not feasible in the  military  service.
He further stated that in view of lack  of  motivation  and  fact  that  the
patient had an adequate trial of duty, he recommended that action  be  taken
for his separation from the service  under  the  appropriate  administrative
regulation.

On 15 February 1955, the applicant’s commander  notified  him  that  he  was
recommending he be discharged from the Air Force  under  the  provisions  of
AFR  39-16  for  unsuitability.   He  acknowledged   receipt,   waived   his
entitlement  to  appear  before  the  board  on  his  behalf  and  requested
discharge without benefit of board proceedings.   The  discharge  case  file
was forwarded to  the  group  adjutant  for  legal  review.   The  discharge
authority  approved  the  recommended  separation  on  10  March  1955,  and
directed that the applicant be discharged and  issued  a  General  Discharge
certificate.

On 18 March 1955, the applicant was  separated  from  military  service  and
discharged Under Honorable Conditions (General).  He  had  served  8  months
and 14 days on active duty.

On 3 September 1957, the Air  Force  Discharge  Review  Board  reviewed  the
applicant’s  case  and  concluded  that  his  general  discharge  should  be
upgraded to honorable, but that he should not be eligible  to  reenlist.   A
new separation document was issued.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFMSA/SGOZ  recommends  denial.   SGOZ  notes  the  applicant’s  request  is
untimely and cannot be substantiated by medical evidence.  SGOZ  states  IAW
AFR 168-4, Administration of Medical Activities, “To correct medical  record
documentation without creating  suspicions  of  record  tampering,  use  the
following procedures:  If an error is identified near in time  to  the  date
of the erroneous entry and the practitioner(s) involved has  present  memory
of the circumstances (general rule)” then the corrective  steps  are  taken.
SGOZ declares there is no medical evidence in  the  record  to  support  the
applicant’s claim and the  provider  cannot  be  contacted  at  this  point.
SGOZ’s evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the  applicant  for
review and comment on 20 May  2005.   As  of  this  date,  this  office  has
received no response (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 evidence has been presented to  demonstrate  the  existence
of probable error or injustice.  After reviewing the applicant’s  submission
and the evidence of record, the Board majority is  not  persuaded  that  the
applicant’s records are in error or that  he  has  been  the  victim  of  an
injustice.  Other than his own contentions, the applicant has  not  provided
any evidence which substantiates his claim that he  did  not  state  to  the
medical examiner during his separation  physical  that  his  father  was  an
alcoholic and/or abusive, or that his  signature  was  forged.   It  is  the
majority opinion that the applicant has failed to sustain  his  burden  that
he has suffered either an error or an injustice.  In view of the  above  and
absent evidence to the contrary,  the  Board  majority  finds  no  basis  to
recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

_________________________________________________________________

RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD:

A majority of the panel finds insufficient evidence of  error  or  injustice
and recommends the application be denied.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number  BC-2005-
01057 in Executive Session on 9 November 2005 under the  provisions  of  AFI
36-2603:

      Mr. Christopher D. Carey, Panel Chairman
      Ms. Barbara R. Murray, Member
      Mr. James A. Wolffe, Member

By a majority vote, the Board recommended denial of  the  application.   Mr.
Carey voted to correct the records but does not desire to submit a  Minority
Report.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 24 Mar 05 w/atchs.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, AFMSA/SGOZ, dated 10 May 05.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 May 05.



                                   CHRISTOPHER D. CAREY
                                   Panel Chair


AFBCMR BC-2005-01057





MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD
                 FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS (AFBCMR)

SUBJECT:  AFBCMR Application of


      I have carefully reviewed the evidence of record and the
recommendation of the Board members.  A majority found that applicant
had not provided substantial evidence of error or injustice and
recommended the case be denied.  I concur with that finding and their
conclusion that relief is not warranted.  Accordingly, I accept their
recommendation that the application be denied.

      Please advise the applicant accordingly.




      JOE G. LINEBERGER
      Director
      Air Force Review Boards Agency