RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  01-00956
		INDEX CODE:  110.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general, under honorable conditions, discharge be upgraded to honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was told he could request that his discharge be upgraded at any time.

Applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 8 Nov 51, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force (RegAF) for a period of four years in the grade of private.

On 7 Jan 52, the Senior Training Officer observed the applicant very closely since it was brought to his attention by applicant’s Flight Leader that applicant had enuresis.  He stated that the applicant was incapable of absorbing the necessary training and adjusting himself to military life.  The applicant’s bed wetting did not improve over the period of four weeks in which he was observed by the Senior Training Officer and the Flight Leader.  The Senior Training Officer felt that applicant’s discharge would be in the best interests of the Air Force and recommended that applicant’s discharge from the military service be considered.  On 7 Jan 52, the Assistant Flight Leader stated that the applicant was first brought to his attention when it was discovered that he had been wetting the bed.  After closely observing the applicant, the Assistant Flight Leader came to the conclusion that it would be useless to attempt to rehabilitate the applicant for further military service and recommended that applicant’s discharge from the military service be considered.  On 7 Jan 52, the Flight Leader stated that during the four weeks the applicant was a member of his flight, the applicant was unable to absorb the necessary training and adjust himself to military life.  He stated that the applicant was brought to his attention when it was discovered that he had been wetting the bed.  Applicant was put under close observation and his condition did not improve.  The Flight Leader felt the applicant’s discharge would be in the best interests of the Air Force.

On 9 Jan 52, a Medical Corps physician examined the applicant mentally and physically.  It was the physician’s opinion there were no mental or physical defects which would entitle the applicant to be discharged under AFR 35‑49 or 39‑14.  He stated the applicant was able to distinguish right from wrong and to adhere to the right; that applicant had wet the bed three or four nights a week all his life; and, that he had never gone for one month without wetting his bed.  The physician stated that applicant was observed in his previous flight for a four-week period during which his enuresis was found to persist.  The physician recommended the applicant appear before a Board of Officers for consideration for administrative discharge from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39‑16 because of enuresis.

On 16 Jan 52, applicant signed a statement indicating that he had enuresis all of his life and it recurred constantly since his entrance into the service.  He further stated that at the time he enlisted in the Air Force, he failed to state to the recruiting authorities that he had a past history of enuresis and therefore he did fraudulently enlist in the Air Force by willfully concealing and withholding information about his physical condition that would have otherwise made him ineligible for military service.

On 18 Jan 52, applicant’s commander recommended the applicant be discharged from the Air Force with a general discharge for willfully concealing the fact that he had a past history of enuresis and had wet the bed all of his life.  The commander stated that Item 38 of applicant’s DD Form 4 (Enlistment Record) as pertains to any form of physical ailment reads negative.  Also, the applicant indicated on his Report of Medical History (Standard Form 89) under Item 19 (Have You Ever) (Check Yes or No), in his own handwriting that he had never had enuresis, while the report of the medical officer indicates applicant stated that he had enuresis all of his life.

On 1 Feb 52, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39‑21 (Fraudulent Entry into Air Force-Concealment of Physical Disqualification) in the grade of private with an under honorable conditions (general) discharge.  He was credited with 2 months and 24 days of active service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Assistant Noncommissioned Officer-in-Charge (NCOIC), Separations Procedures Section, AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed this application and indicated that, based upon the documentation in the file, they believe the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  Additionally, the discharge was within the sound discretion of the discharge authority.  The applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.  He provided no other facts warranting an upgrade of the discharge.  Accordingly, DPPRS recommends his records remain the same and his request be denied.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 15 Jun 01 for review and response.  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 probable error or injustice.  After careful consideration of the circumstances of this case, we are not persuaded that the discharge action was in error or unjust.  The evidence of record supports the stated reason for applicant’s discharge, i.e., concealing the fact that he had a past history of enuresis.  Therefore, in our opinion, responsible officials applied appropriate standards in effecting the applicant’s involuntary separation, and we did not find persuasive evidence that pertinent regulations were violated or that applicant was not afforded all rights to which entitled at the time of his discharge.  In view of the foregoing, and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we conclude that no basis exists to recommend favorable action on the applicant’s request.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of probable 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 this application in Executive Session on 19 July 2001, under the provisions of Air Force Instruction 36‑2603:

	            Vice Chair
	            Member
	            Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 13 Apr 01, w/atch.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 10 May 01.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 15 Jun 01.

                                   
                                   Vice Chair