RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2002-03053
						      (Case 2)
		INDEX CODE:  108.02

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His discharge be changed to a disability discharge.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Due to a pre-service left wrist injury, he was issued a waiver during basic training.  Subsequent to basic training, he was assigned heavy lifting that resulted in his back, neck and wrist being injured.

He has suffered since his discharge because of his back and neck injuries and the aggravation to his left wrist.  He was forced out of the Air Force injured and did not get due process.  He is currently on Social Security disability as a result of his military injuries.

In support of his request, the applicant submits copies of a Record of Inpatient Treatment and a Standard Form 502, Narrative Summary (Clinical Resume).  The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant contracted his enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 29 Apr 85 for a period of six years.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of airman first class (E-3), with an effective date and date of rank of 13 Jun 85.

On 18 Aug 86, the applicant received notification that he was being recommended for discharge for conditions that interfere with military service, character and behavior disorder.  The reason for this action was due to his mental health evaluation of 16 Jun 86.  The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification; he consulted with counsel and submitted a written statement in his behalf.  On 30 Sep 86, the discharge authority approved the recommended separation and directed that the applicant be issued an honorable discharge.

The applicant was honorably discharged on 7 Oct 86 under the provisions of AFR 39-10 (conditions that interfere with military service-not disability-character and behavior disorder).  He had completed a total of 1 year, 5 months and 3 days and was serving in the grade of airman basic (E-1) at the time of discharge.
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends the application be denied.  The AFBCMR Medical Consultant states that ongoing occupational difficulties led to referral for mental health evaluation and diagnosis of a personality disorder that rendered the applicant unsuitable for continued service in the Air Force.  His back pain began in Dec 85 without specific injury that persisted for the remainder of his time on active duty prompting numerous clinic visits, courses of physical therapy, duty restrictions and two hospitalizations.  A medical record entry, dated 29 Aug 86, reports that the orthopedic surgeon felt that the applicant’s back pain was functional in origin, i.e., due to or aggravated by psychologic factors.  An emergency record, dated 8 Jul 85, indicates that the applicant re-injured his wrist while playing basketball and was diagnosed with a sprain.  He had infrequent medical record entries for his wrist.  On 4 Jan 86, the applicant strained his neck washing a truck and was placed on a temporary physical profile during the period 6-13 Jan 86.  Following discharge from the Air Force, the applicant filed a claim for disability with the Veterans Administration (VA) for fractured left wrist, speech problem, cervical and low back pain and neuropsychiatric problem.  A VA Rating Decision, dated 1 Dec 86, denied his claim for service connected disability finding relating to the aforementioned.  A VA evaluation in Feb 87 suspected personality disorder, but indicated overall good functioning without evidence of mental illness.  Subsequent to his discharge, the applicant was employed by McDonnell Douglas for five years.  Beginning in 1993, the applicant experienced problems with depression and in subsequent years (no later than 1997) psychotic symptoms requiring treatment with anti-psychotic medications, antidepressants and counseling.  As a result, he has been unemployed and at times homeless.  The AFBCMR Medical Consultant states that the evidence of record indicates that the applicant’s back pain, neck pain, stuttering and wrist pain did not warrant referral into the Air Force Disability Evaluation System.  Personality disorders are life-long patterns of maladjustment in the individual’s personality structure which are not medically disqualifying or unfitting, but may render the individual unsuitable for further military service and may be the cause for administrative action by the individual’s unit commander.  Action and disposition in this case are proper and equitable reflecting compliance with Air Force directives that implement the law.  The AFBCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C.

HQ AFPC/DPPD recommends the application be denied.  DPPD states that the decision to process a member through the military disability evaluation system (DES) is determined by a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) when the member is determined disqualified for continued military service.  The decision to conduct an MEB is made by the medical treatment facility providing health care to the member.  The applicant’s Mental Health Evaluation diagnosed him with a mixed Personality Disorder with anti-social, paranoid and narcissistic features.  Department of Defense (DoD) policy states that Personality and Adjustment Disorders do not constitute a physical disability under the provisions of federal disability laws and policy, and are not ratable or compensable under Title 10, USC.  These conditions are considered unsuiting rather than unfitting.  A review of the administrative discharge package was completed by the local Staff Judge Advocate and found legally sufficient to support the proposed discharge action.  According to the applicant’s records, treatments for his back pain, neck pain and wrist pain were not severe enough to warrant his referral to the Air Force DES.  Medical documentation appears to reflect the applicant was reasonably capable of performing the duties of his office, grade, rank or rating right up until his release from active duty.  USAF disability boards can only rate unfitting medical conditions based upon the individual’s medical status at the time of their evaluation; in essence, a snapshot of the condition at that time.  The applicant’s case file revealed no errors or irregularities during his involuntary administrative discharge process that would justify a change to his military records.  The HQ AFPC/DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to applicant on 4 Apr 03 for review and response.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office (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.  We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the respective Air Force offices 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.  The discharge appears to be in compliance with the governing Air Force regulation and we find no evidence to indicate that his administrative separation from the Air Force was inappropriate.  In view of the above and absent evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.
_________________________________________________________________

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-2002-03053 in Executive Session on 22 May 03, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	            Panel Chair
	            Member
	            Member

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 18 Sep 02, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 4 Mar 03.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPD, dated 2 Apr 03.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Apr 03.