RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-02107

	 	COUNSEL:  DISABLED AMERICAN
				   VETERANS

	 	HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His narrative reason for separation be changed from “Personality Disorder” to “Depression.”

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He believes the diagnosis of a personality disorder was inaccurate, and that a diagnosis of depression would have been more accurate.

He is currently obtaining treatment from mental health professionals.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provided a copy of his separation document and statements from a therapist and the Disabled American Veterans (DAV).

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 4 Mar 98 for a period of six years in the grade of airman.  

On 18 Dec 00, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intent to recommend his discharge for conditions that interfered with military service - mental disorders.  The specific reasons were:  On 24 Oct 00, the applicant was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder with mixed disturbance of emotions and conduct and avoidant personality disorder; on 16 Nov 00, he received a letter of counseling (LOC) for disobeying a lawful order issued to him by a noncommissioned officer (NCO) by not being at his appointed place of duty; and, on 7 Dec 00, he received an LOC for disobeying a lawful order issued to him by a commissioned officer by reporting to his place of duty in his battle dress uniform (BDU) when he had been instructed to report in mission-oriented protective posture (MOPP) condition 2.  The applicant was advised of his rights in the matter and an honorable discharge would be recommended.  

The Office of the Staff Judge Advocate found the discharge case file to be legally sufficient and recommended that the discharge authority direct the applicant be discharged with service characterized as honorable.

On 27 Dec 00, the discharge authority approved the discharge action and directed the applicant be furnished an honorable discharge.

On 29 Dec 00, the applicant was honorably discharged under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Personality Disorder).  He was credited with 2 years, 9 months, and 26 days of active service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Medical Consultant recommended denial noting the applicant was administratively discharged for unsuitability due to avoidant personality disorder.  During the period he was on active duty, the applicant also experienced symptoms of depressed mood related to situational stresses of military service diagnosed as an adjustment disorder.  The applicant’s symptom of depressed mood was diagnosed by several different psychologists as an adjustment disorder.  The evidence of record shows the applicant’s symptoms improved with anticipated separation consistent with the diagnosis.  Over one year following his discharge, the applicant experienced depressed mood diagnosed as major depressive disorder, recurrent, that responded to treatment.  According to the Medical Consultant, a diagnosis of major depressive disorder over one year after separation does not indicate that the applicant’s diagnoses were wrong while on active duty.  The presence of avoidant personality disorder predisposes an individual to the development of adjustment disorder and depressive disorder, and contributes to the resulting social and occupational difficulties.  A diagnosis of an adjustment disorder or depressive disorder does not exclude a personality disorder diagnosis since they can and do co-exist in many individuals.  In the Medical Consultant’s view, the action and disposition in this case were proper and equitable reflecting compliance with Air Force directives that implement the law, and no change in the records is warranted.

A complete copy of the Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial indicating the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation, and was within the discretion of the discharge authority.  In their view, the applicant submitted no new evidence or identified any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge process.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPRS evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to applicant on 19 Dec 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 timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.  The applicant's complete submission was thoroughly reviewed and his contentions were duly noted.  However, we do not find the applicant’s assertions or the documentation presented sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the offices of primary responsibility.  The evidence of record indicates the applicant was involuntarily discharged for a personality disorder.  There is no indication in the evidence provided that the applicant’s discharge was improper or contrary to the provisions of the discharge directive under which it was effected.  In view of the foregoing, and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we adopt the Air Force rationale and conclude that no basis exists to recommend favorable action on the applicant’s request that his narrative reason for separation be changed.

_________________________________________________________________

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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2003-02107 in Executive Session on 10 Feb 04, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 7 May 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, Medical Consultant, dated 17 Nov 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 11 Dec 03, w/atch.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Dec 03.