RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-1999-01111

	 	COUNSEL:  NONE

	 	HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to show that his undesirable discharge in 1956 be changed to a medical discharge.

_________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Due to his physical condition, the doctors at --- AFB, NY, said that he would receive a medical discharge with a 30% disability rating; however, his voluntary early out discharge was dishonored.

The applicant states that the base commander asked him if he would like to volunteer for an early out discharge.  He received his discharge orders and was told his discharge and mustering out pay would be mailed to him.  However, instead he received orders to report to --- AFB, LA.  He had two days to report which was impossible to do by bus.  He was a day and a half late and was taken to the stockade for 30 days.  He had no hearing or trial and the harsh treatment and abuse caused stomach and back trouble.  After his release, he was unable to perform his duties.  He met with three doctors at ---- AFB Hospital and was told that he would be discharged with a 30% disability rating.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 21 February 1952 for a period of four years.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of airman third class.

He was tried by a summary court-martial on 12 September 1952, on one specification of violating Article 86 (Absent without Leave (AWOL)) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).  Specifically, for absenting himself, without proper authority, from his organization, on or about 25 August 1952.  He pled guilty to the charge.   He was found guilty of the charge and sentenced to 15 days confinement at hard labor and forfeiture of $50.00.

He was tried by a summary court-martial on 18 December 1953, on one specification of violating Article 134 of the UCMJ.  Specifically, for being drunk and disorderly in a public place, on or about 8 December 1953.  He pled not guilty to the charge.   He was found guilty of the charge and sentenced to forfeiture of $60.00.

He was reassigned from overseas to --- AFB, LA, with a report not later than date of 24 August 1954.

He was tried by a summary court-martial on 21 September 1954, on one specification of violating Article 86 (AWOL) of the UCMJ.  Specifically, for absenting himself, without proper authority, from his organization, on or about 4 September 1954, and remaining absent until on or about 15 September 1954.  He pled guilty to the charge.   He was found guilty of the charge and sentenced to 30 days confinement at hard labor and forfeiture of $60.00.

He was air-evacuated from --- AFB, LA, on 3 February 1955, to the ---th USAF Hospital at --- AFB, MS, for an anxiety reaction.

On 10 April 1955, he again went AWOL and after a period of 30 days he was dropped from the roles and placed in a deserter status until his apprehention on or about 6 March 1956.

He underwent a psychiatric evaluation on 23 April 1956, which diagnosed his condition as an inadequate personality, chronic, manifested by inadequate responses to intellectual, emotional and social demands, with instability, ineptness, and poor judgment.

He underwent a separation physical on 23 April 1956, and was found medically qualified for discharge.

On 8 June 1956, he was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-23 (Desertion and Physical Unfitness), with service characterized as undesirable.  He completed 2 years, 5 months, and 10 days of active service, which excludes 418 days of lost time (AWOL 22 Aug -8 Sep 52 (18 days), Confinement 9 - 26 Sep 52 (17 days), AWOL 3 - 14 Sep 54 (12 days), Confinement 15 Sep - 19 Oct 54 (35 days), AWOL 10 Apr - 9 May 55 (30 days), and dropped from rolls 10 May 55 - 7 Mar 56 (306 days)).

On 31 January 1964, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied his request to change his discharge.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends the application be denied and states that the evidence of record established beyond all reasonable doubt that the applicant was medically qualified for continued active duty, that the reason for his discharge was proper, and that no error or injustice occurred in this case.  While he was treated for some ordinary medical problems while on active duty, as will occur in most service members, none of these problems singly, nor any combination of them, was of sufficient severity to justify an unfit finding.  Furthermore, there is no evidence to suggest that he deserved consideration for separation through the Disability Evaluation System.

The BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPD recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that the applicant has not submitted any material or documentation to show that he was unfit due to a physical disability at the time of his discharge.  Although his records reflect that he was treated for various medical conditions throughout his military career, none appear to have been serious enough to warrant that he be entered into the medical disability evaluation system.

The AFPC/DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

Complete copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 24 September 1999 for review and response within 30 days.  On 20 October 1999, his application was temporarily withdrawn in accordance with his 14 October 1999 request.

In an application, dated 25 July 2002, the applicant provided his response to the evaluations in which, he states, in part, that his physical problems include congenital back problems and continuous and persistent stomach problems which made his military service time problematic and his duty sporadic.  He was expecting to receive an early out discharge and instead was reassigned to --- AFB, LA, without proper allowance being given.

The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit H.

_________________________________________________________________

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 a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his discharge should be changed.  The offices of primary responsibility have adequately addressed applicant’s contentions and we agree with their opinions and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden that he has suffered either an error or an injustice.  Hence, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought.

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-1991-01111 in Executive Session on 21 August 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 21 Apr 99, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 20 Jul 99.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 9 Sep 99.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Sep 99.
    Exhibit F.  VA Form 21-4138, dated 14 Oct 99.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 20 Oct 99.
    Exhibit H.  DD Form 149, dated 25 Jul 02, w/atchs.