RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02354
            INDEX CODE:  110.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NOT INDICATED


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  3 FEBRUARY 2008

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be changed to  a  medical
discharge.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The  Air  Force   never   considered   his   background   or   his   illness
(mentally)[sic].  He was paranoid because of what his  father  went  through
after fighting in World War II and the Korean conflict.

He was under a lot of pressure due to the war or  conflict  that  was  going
on. He was not warned initially of the use of drugs in the service.  He  got
caught  with  a  marijuana  cigarette  in  his  room  and  believes  he  was
railroaded by the Office of Special Investigation (OSI).   He  did  not  get
his rights read to him or proper representation  when  he  was  brought  in.
The punishment was too severe; all he wanted to do is serve his country.

He was diagnosed as a paranoid schizophrenic  “due  to  his  time  connected
with the service.”

In support of his request, applicant provided his personal statement  and  a
copy of his DD Form 214,  Armed  Forces  of  the  United  States  Report  of
Transfer or Discharge.

The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 27 Jul 65, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force in  the  grade
of  airman  basic  (E-1)  for  a  period  of  four  years.   Applicant   was
progressively promoted to the grade of airman third  class  (E-2)  effective
and with a date of rank of 9 Sep 65.

On 17 Nov 66, the squadron commander notified  the  applicant  that  he  was
recommending he  be  discharged  from  the  Air  Force  for  unfitness.   He
recommended applicant receive  an  under  other  than  honorable  conditions
(undesirable) discharge based on the following:

    a.  Possession of marijuana, as  evidenced  by  an  (Office  of  Special
Investigation (OSI)) Report of Investigation.

    b.  On 19 May 66, applicant received an Article 15 for being  disorderly
on station and breaking restriction.  Punishment consisted of forfeiture  of
$15.00.

    c.  On 21 Sep 66, applicant received an Article 15 for being  disorderly
on station and breaking restriction.  Punishment consisted of  reduction  in
grade to airman basic, forfeiture of $15.00 pay per  month  for  two  months
and 14 days of extra duty.

On 29 Dec 66, the applicant acknowledged  receipt  of  the  notification  of
discharge and, after consulting with legal counsel, did not waive his  right
to a hearing before an administrative discharge board.  He indicated he  was
not submitting statements in his own behalf and he understood  that  he  may
receive an under other than honorable conditions (undesirable) discharge.

On 18 Jan 67, applicant was notified to appear before a  board  of  officers
to determine whether or not he should be separated from the  Air  Force  for
unfitness.  Applicant acknowledged receipt of  the  notification  to  appear
before a board of officers on 23 Jan 67.

On 23 Jan 67, the board of officers found that the applicant  possessed  and
used marijuana without authority on  16  Aug  66.   The  board  of  officers
recommended applicant be discharged  with  an  under  other  than  honorable
conditions (undesirable) discharge.  On 16 Mar 67, the Staff Judge  Advocate
found the case file legally sufficient to support discharge and  recommended
an under other  than  honorable  conditions  (undesirable)  discharge.   The
discharge authority  approved  the  separation  and  directed  applicant  be
discharged with an  under  other  than  honorable  conditions  (undesirable)
discharge.

Applicant was discharged on 27 Mar 67, in the grade of airman  basic,  under
the provisions of AFM  39-12,  for  unfitness  –  proceedings  of  board  of
officers) and issued an under other than honorable conditions  (undesirable)
discharge.  He served one year, eight months, and one day on active duty.

On 9 Apr 68, the Air Force Discharge Review  Board  (AFDRB)  considered  all
the evidence of record and concluded that a change in the type or nature  of
applicant’s discharge was not warranted.

On 19 Apr 68, the  Air  Force  Board  for  Correction  of  Military  Records
directed the pertinent military records of the Department of the Air  Force,
relating to the applicant be corrected to show that on 27  Mar  67,  he  was
discharged  with  an  under  honorable   conditions   (general)   discharge.
Applicant was issued a new DD Form 214, Report  of  Separation  from  Active
Duty reflecting  he  was  discharged  with  an  under  honorable  conditions
(general) discharge.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied,  and  states,  in  part,
based on the documentation on file in  the  master  personnel  records,  the
discharge was consistent with the procedural  and  substantive  requirements
of the discharge regulation.  The discharge was  within  the  discretion  of
the discharge authority.

The applicant did  not  submit  any  evidence  or  identify  any  errors  or
injustices that occurred in the  discharge  processing.   Additionally,  the
applicant provided  no  facts  warranting  his  under  honorable  conditions
(general) discharge to be changed to a medical discharge.

A complete copy of the DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant sent in  a  copy  of  his  father’s  DD  Form  214  and  honorable
discharge certificate from the Army.  He says if you look  at  his  father’s
medical records it should show, or tell  why  his  condition  was  like  his
Dads.  He would appreciate it  very  much  if  someone  would  look  up  his
father’s records and find this out for him.

Applicant's complete response 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  error  or  injustice.   After  careful  consideration  of  the
available evidence, the discharge appears  to  be  in  compliance  with  the
governing regulations in effect at the time  and  we  find  no  evidence  to
indicate his separation from the Air Force should be changed  to  a  medical
discharge.  We find no evidence of error in this case and  after  thoroughly
reviewing the documentation submitted in support of applicant’s  appeal,  we
do not believe he has suffered from an injustice.  Therefore, based  on  the
available evidence of record, we find  no  basis  upon  which  to  favorably
consider his request.

_________________________________________________________________

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-2006-
02354 in Executive Session on 14 November 2006, under the provisions of  AFI
36-2603:

      Mr. Laurence M. Groner, Panel Chair
      Ms. Mary C. Puckett, Member
      Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Member

The following documentary evidence  pertaining  to  Docket  Number  BC-2006-
02354 was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 26 Jun 06, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 17 Aug 06.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 Sep 06.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, undated, w/atchs.




                                             LAURENCE M. GRONER
                                             Panel Chair