RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-00803
		INDEX CODE:  110.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His narrative reason for separation be changed to allow eligibility to enlist in the Air Force Reserve or the Air National Guard.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He does not believe that he has a personality disorder.  He was diagnosed with this disorder due to the amount of stress he was under at that time.

In support of his request, the applicant submits a personal statement and copies of his DD Form 214 and separation order.  The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant contracted his enlistment in the Regular Air Force in the grade of airman first class (E-3) for a period of six years on 14 June 2000.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of senior airman (E-4), with an effective date and date of rank of 14 April 2002.

On 29 October 2002, the applicant received notification that he was being recommended for discharge for a condition that interferes with the military service; specifically, a mental disorder.  The reason for this action was due to a commander directed mental health evaluation, conducted on or about 17 September 2002, wherein an Air Force psychologist diagnosed the applicant as suffering from an Adjustment Disorder, with Mixed Disturbance of Emotions and Conduct.  On 1 November 2002, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification, that military legal counsel was made available and that he consulted with counsel, and that he waived his right to submit statements in his behalf.  The local Staff Judge Advocate recommended that the applicant be separated with an honorable service characterization, without probation and rehabilitation.  On 6 November 2002, the discharge authority approved the recommended separation and directed that the applicant be issued an honorable discharge.

On 6 November 2002, the applicant was honorably discharged under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Personality Disorder).  He had completed a total of 2 years, 4 months and 22 days and was serving in the grade of senior airman (E-4) at the time of discharge.  He received an RE Code of 2C, which defined means "Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service."
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends the application be denied.  The AFBCMR Medical Consultant stated that the applicant underwent a formal command-directed mental health evaluation in September 2002 because of continuing unwillingness to carry a weapon and adjust to military requirements.  His formal diagnoses for that evaluation were Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Disturbance of Emotions and Conduct.  Diagnosis on Axis II for the formal psychiatric diagnosis (personality) was “deferred” but the mental health report stated that testing suggested the existence of a personality disorder.  Numerous mental health record entries by different mental health providers specifically noted the presence of maladaptive passive aggressive and dependent personality traits and, on the 23 September 2002 mental health progress note, the psychologist listed Personality Disorder Not Otherwise Specified in his diagnosis and stipulated “no weapons.”  The formal mental health report recommended administrative discharge for unsuitability due to adjustment disorder and “strong maladaptive personality traits” with poor motivation and poor insight.

The AFBCMR Medical Consultant stated that the applicant’s records document an adjustment disorder and “strong maladaptive personality traits” versus personality disorder in combination with a lack of motivation for continued service.  Adjustment Disorder, Personality Disorder and maladaptive personality traits are conditions that may render an individual unsuitable for military service and cause for administrative discharge.  Stressful life circumstances such as marital discord, divorce, illness or death of a parent, are commonly experienced by members of the military, the majority of whom continue to function effectively in their jobs in spite of their sad feelings.  When an individual responds to common life stressors to the degree of becoming dysfunctional, their ability to cope with the stresses of military service, operational environments and combat is called into question.  The fact that the applicant is functioning well at this time at home confirms his diagnosis of Adjustment Disorder; however, it does not predict that he will respond well to the stresses of military operations, deployment or combat when he is separated from his familiar surroundings and usual support system of family and friends.  The applicant’s past experience is predictive of an increased risk for recurrence of debilitating symptoms if re-exposed to the rigors of military training and service.  Action and disposition in this case are proper and equitable reflecting compliance with Air Force directives that implement the law.  The AFBCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C.

HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied.  Based upon the documentation in the file, DPPRS believes the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  DPPRS stated that the Department of Defense uses the term “personality disorder” administratively to include all unsuiting mental health diagnoses, character and behavior disorders including Adjustment Disorder, Personality Disorder and Impulse Control Disorders.  Although the applicant was not specifically diagnosed with “personality disorder,” administratively it is correct.  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 a change in his discharge.  The HQ AFPC/DPPRS evaluation, with attachment Exhibit D.

HQ AFPC/DPPAE stated that the applicant’s reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of “2C” is correct.  The HQ AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit E.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to applicant on 3 July 2003 for review and response.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit F).
_________________________________________________________________

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.  His contentions are duly noted; however, we do not find these uncorroborated assertions, in and by themselves sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the AFBCMR Medical Consultant.  We therefore 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.  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-2003-00803 in Executive Session on 14 August 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	            Panel Chair
	            Member
	            Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 27 Feb 03, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 6 May 03.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 23 May 03.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAE, dated 27 Jun 03.
   Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Jul 03.

                                   
                                   Panel Chair