RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-02031
		INDEX CODE:  110.00

	APPLICANT	COUNSEL: 

	SSN	HEARING DESIRED: No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her entry-level separation be changed to an honorable discharge and the reason for discharge be changed to "Involuntary Separation."

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She was told by her recruiter to only report medical conditions that occurred on a daily basis.  She was not medically diagnosed as having a personality disorder.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 13 November 2001 for a period of four years.

On 22 May 2002, applicant was notified of her commander's intent to recommend her for discharge for sleepwalking.

The commander stated the following reasons for the proposed discharge: The applicant on a recent Personnel Reliability Program (PRP) screening questionnaire identified that she had experienced sleepwalking and on 10 May 2002, Capt B. identified the applicant as having the functional impairment of sleepwalking.  Because of the condition Capt B. did not give her a medical clearance or a recommendation for PRP duties.

The commander advised applicant of her right to consult legal counsel and that legal counsel had been obtained to assist her; and to submit statements in her own behalf, or waive the above rights after consulting with counsel.

The commander indicated in her recommendation for discharge action that if her recommendation was approved, the applicant's separation would be characterized as entry-level.  The commander did not recommend probation and rehabilitation because the applicant's condition rendered her incapable of continued military service.  The commander did not believe the applicant's retention or active duty in a probationary status would be consistent with the maintenance of good order and discipline.

On 14 May 2002, after consulting with counsel, applicant submitted a written statement for consideration in her discharge action.

A legal review was conducted on 31 May 2002 in which the staff judge advocate (SJA) recommended the applicant be discharged for sleepwalking.  The SJA concurred with squadron commander and recommended the applicant be discharged with an entry-level discharge without probation and rehabilitation and no base barment.

Applicant's DD Form 214  indicates  that  she was  discharged on 4 June 2002, in the grade of airman first class with uncharacterized service, in accordance with AFI 36-3208, with a narrative reason for separation as personality disorder.  She served 7 months and 23 days of active military service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Chief Medical Consultant, AFBCMR, states that sleepwalking is an unsuitable condition for military service and is subject to administrative discharge.  The applicant had a history of sleepwalking after the age of 12, which she did not report until after she enlisted in the Air Force.  The applicant received an entry-level separation, service uncharacterized.  An entry-level separation is given when the service member has served 180 days or less of active duty.

The Medical Consultant further states the action and disposition of the case was proper and equitable, however, the narrative reason, personality disorder, is not an accurate term for all unsuiting behavioral conditions (personality disorders, adjustment disorders, impulse control disorders, sleepwalking, etc).  Personality Disorder is a specific diagnosis and its use on the DD Form 214, when applied to individuals with unsuiting conditions other than personality disorder can be misleading.  He recommends the narrative reason on the applicant's discharge show a more appropriate reason other than personality disorder; however, he recommends no change in the reenlistment code.

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

HQ AFPC/DPPRS states based upon the documentation in the applicant's records, they believe her discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  Also, the discharge was within the sound discretion of the discharge authority.

Air Force policy is that entry-level separations/uncharacterized service characterizations are given to service members who have not completed more than 180 days of continuous active service.  The Department of Defense (DOD) determined if a service member served less than 180 days of active service, that it would be unfair to the member to characterize that service.  The applicant's uncharacterized service is correct and in accordance with DOD and AFIs.  The uncharacterized separation should not be viewed as negative and not be confused with other types of separations.

DPPRS recommends changing the narrative reason for separation in Block 28 of the DD Form 214 to read, "Conditions Not A Disability" with the Separation Code in Block 26 changed to "JFV." In addition, in Block 23 should be changed to "Entry-Level Separation.

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 27 September 2002, 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 timely filed.

3.	Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an injustice or error to warrant a change in the characterization of the applicant's discharge.  After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record, we are not persuaded that the applicant's entry-level separation should be changed to an honorable discharge.  In this respect, we note that discharge process was initiated prior to the applicant reaching 180 days of active duty.  We note that an individual is given an entry-level separation with uncharacterized service characterization when the separation action commences within the first 180 days of continuous active service.  Therefore, since discharge processing was initiated at the 178 day point, it appears that the applicant's discharge processing was appropriate and in compliance with the governing directives.  In view of foregoing, we find no compelling basis upon which to recommend favorable action on this portion of the applicant's request.

4.	Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice warranting a change to the applicant's narrative reason for separation.  While we are not persuaded that the reason should be changed to "Involuntary Separation," we note that the applicant was apparently advised by her recruiter to only report medical conditions which occurred daily, therefore, she did not report her sleepwalking.  Had she reported this condition, it is likely she would have been disqualified for enlistment.  Notwithstanding the foregoing, we note that the BCMR Medical Consultant has indicated that the narrative reason for her separation "Personality Disorder," is inaccurate inasmuch as personality disorder is used administratively on the DD Form 214 as a general category term for all unsuiting behavioral conditions.  However, as the Consultant indicated, personality disorder is a specific diagnosis and its use on a DD Form 214 can be misleading when applied to individuals with unsuiting conditions other than personality disorders.  Since sleepwalking is an unsuiting condition, we agree with the recommendation of the Air Force that the narrative reason should be changed to reflect the correct reason for her separation - "Conditions Not a Disability" with the appropriate separation program designator and this we so recommend.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 4 June 2002, she was separated with an Entry Level Separation, under the provisions of AFR 36-3208, paragraph 5.11.2 (Conditions Not a Disability) with a separation code of JFV.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number 02-2031 in Executive Session on November 6, 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

All members voted to correct the records as recommended.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 14 Jun 02, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.	Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, dated 
			21 Aug 02.
	Exhibit D.	Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 18 Sep 02.
	Exhibit E.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Sep 02.

				Panel Chair

AFBCMR 02-02031
INDEX CODE:  110.00

MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

	Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction for Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116) it is directed that:

	The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, SSN, be corrected to show that on 4 June 2002, she was separated with an Entry Level Separation, under the provisions of AFR 36-3208, paragraph 5.11.2 (Conditions Not a Disability) with a separation code of JFV.

					Director
					Air Force Review Boards Agency