RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-02578
		INDEX CODE:  110.02
		COUNSEL:  NONE 

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His discharge be upgraded to honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He had just received an honorable discharge from the Army National Guard when he joined the Air Force.  The recruiter told him he would again have to attend Basic Military Training and would attend supply school.  When he enlisted, he was only 19 ½ years of age and hotheaded and wouldn’t take very much of anything.  If he knew then what he knows now, he wouldn’t be writing this letter. 

He has completed a program of study in Plywood Hydraulic System Troubleshooting.  He has worked as an electrician for 14 years at Boise Cascade Mills.  He is a 30-year retired electrician.   

In support of his request, applicant submits a personal statement, copies of diplomas, a copy of his DD Form 214, a copy of his honorable discharge certificate and a certificate of training from the Department of the Army.  

His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Army National Guard on 2 September 1960 and was discharged on 1 March 1961 for successfully completing six months of active duty training.  On 18 May 1961, applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force for a period of 4 years in the grade of E-2 and was enrolled in basic military training (BMT).

Because of great difficulties in academics and his inability to get along with his training instructors and fellow airmen, his squadron referred him to the Mental Hygiene Division.  On 21 June 1961, the Aerospace Medical Center, Lackland AFB, TX, performed a mental health evaluation on the applicant.  The mental health evaluation diagnosed him as passive aggressive reaction, chronic, severe, manifested by extreme passive obstructionism, sarcasm, belligerence, total disregard for authoritative figures and for the rights of others, and total inability to accept any form of discipline.  

On 28 June 1961, in accordance with AFR 39-16, paragraph 4b, Section A, and paragraph 9b(4), Section C, the commander initiated discharge proceedings against the applicant.  The applicant was advised of his rights in this matter.  The applicant waived his right to submit statements in his behalf and to military legal counsel.  On 11 July 1961, the discharge authority directed that the applicant be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39-16, paragraph 4b, Section A, and paragraph 9b(4), Section C with a type of discharge as general.  The applicant was discharged on 14 July 1961.  He had served 1 month and 27 days on active duty in the Regular Air Force and a total of 7 months and 27 days of active service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied.  DPPRS states that based upon the documentation in the file, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  

The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant states that when he enlisted in the Air Force he didn’t have to go to BMT and would be put in an on-the-job training status in supply.  The drill instructors didn’t like prior service personnel and the commanders didn’t know what was going on half the time.  

Applicant’s 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 timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.  Applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, we find no evidence of error in this case and after thoroughly reviewing the documentation that has been submitted, the Board does not believe he has suffered from an injustice.  The applicant has provided no evidence showing the information in his discharge case file was erroneous, his substantial rights were violated, or that his commanders abused their discretionary authority.  Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  In view of the above, favorable consideration of the applicant’s request is not possible. 

_________________________________________________________________

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 5 February 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36‑2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 August 2002, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 12 September 2002.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 September 2002.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, undated.