RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-00473
            INDEX CODE:  110.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  13 AUGUST 2006

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general  (under  honorable  conditions)  discharge  be  upgraded  to  an
honorable discharge.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He desires his discharge be upgraded.  He indicates he’s sorry  he  did  not
do a better job while in the service.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Portions of the applicant's military personnel  records  were  destroyed  by
fire in 1973 at the National Personnel Record Center (NPRC)  in  St.  Louis,
Missouri.   Therefore,  the  facts  surrounding  his  discharge  cannot   be
verified.  The available records indicate the following.

On 17 July 1957, the applicant enlisted in  the  Regular  Air  Force  for  a
period of four years.

A psychiatric hospitalization narrative summary  (for  hospitalization  from
11 December 1968 to  21  January  1969)  indicates  the  applicant  took  an
overdose of Dilantin after beating his wife.   He  spent  several  weeks  in
medical services and was transferred  to  psychiatric  services  where  they
found  no  evidence  of  psychosis.   The  summary  further  indicates   the
applicant was court-martialed several times.  He  drank  heavily  throughout
his time in the service.  After discharge from the service, his work  record
was erratic.  He was a truck driver, a spray painter and supposedly had  ten
or more jobs, which usually were terminated by his quitting.  He married  at
the age of 21, had two children, divorced; married the second time  in  1965
and he  indicated  married  life  had  been  anything  but  happy.   It  was
understood his second wife was  much  older  than  he.   The  applicant  was
abusive toward his spouse and for this reason he  was  placed  in  jail  and
transferred to the Department  of  Veterans  Affairs  (DVA)  hospital.   The
applicant also stated he was hospitalized in 1964  and  1965  due  to  heavy
drinking.  He indicated he had been drinking quite heavily and  indeed  from
history, this had been true throughout his life.  He claimed  on  the  night
he attacked his wife he remembered little about it.  Throughout  his  period
of  hospitalization,  he  impressed  one  as  being  a  somewhat   dependent
individual who resorted to alcohol and then  became  quite  aggressive.   He
was to  return  to  the  hospital  on  a  monthly  basis  for  psychological
counseling which he agreed to.

The applicant’s separation medical examination  indicates  he  was  referred
for a mental health examination because of  his  failure  to  learn  and  to
perform  his  duties.   No  diagnosis  of  a  medical   disease   could   be
established.  From the psychological standpoint, the applicant  exhibited  a
defective attitude within the  meaning  of  paragraph  4B,  AFR  39-16.   No
psychiatric abnormalities were noted at that time.

The applicant provided a medical statement dated 30  August  2004  from  his
psychiatrist who indicates the applicant had been a patient  of  the  mental
health clinic since May 1989 with a diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder.

On 9 December 1960, the applicant was discharged with service  characterized
as general (under honorable conditions) under the provisions of AFR 39-16  -
Inaptitude or Unsuitability.  He served 3 years, 4 months, and  18  days  of
total active duty service with five days of lost time.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommended denial indicating the applicant  was
administratively discharged for  inaptitude  or  unsuitability  in  December
1960 after a psychiatric evaluation found no psychiatric abnormality (it  is
not clear if the evaluation identified personality  disorder).   During  the
decade  following  his  discharge,  psychiatric  evaluations  including   an
inpatient  psychiatric  evaluation  extending  over  one   month   diagnosed
personality disorder and alcohol abuse.  By May 1989, over  20  years  after
discharge, the applicant was diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder.

Evidence of the record finds no evidence of active  schizophrenia  while  on
active duty  nor  during  the  nine  years  following  his  discharge.   The
preponderance of evidence indicates that  action  and  disposition  in  this
case  are  proper  and  equitable  reflecting  compliance  with  Air   Force
directives that implement the law.

The evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 19 December 2005, a copy of the Air Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to
the applicant for review and response within 30 days.  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 to timely file.

3.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to  demonstrate  the
existence  of  an  error  or  injustice.   Based  upon  the  presumption  of
regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs and  without  evidence  to
the contrary, we must assume the applicant's discharge  was  proper  and  in
compliance with appropriate directives.  Therefore, based on  the  available
evidence of record, we find no basis upon which to favorably  consider  this
application.

4.    Although the applicant  did  not  specifically  request  consideration
based  on  clemency,  we  also  find  insufficient  evidence  to  warrant  a
recommendation that the discharge be upgraded  on  that  basis.   Therefore,
based on the evidence  of  record,  we  cannot  conclude  that  clemency  is
warranted.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented  did  not  demonstrate  the
existence of an error or injustice; the application  was  denied  without  a
personal appearance; and 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-2005-
00473 in Executive Session on 26 January 2006, under the provisions  of  AFI
36-2603:

                 Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Patricia R. Collins, Member
                 Ms. LeLoy Cottrell, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 7 January 2005, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Available Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant,
                 dated 15 December 2005.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 December 2005.




                       RICHARD A. PETERSON
                       Panel Chair