RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-01931
		INDEX NUMBER:  110.00
	XXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL:  None

	XXXXXXX	HEARING DESIRED:  No

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  16 Dec 06

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The narrative reason for her separation from the Air Force be changed from “Personality Disorder” to “Anxiety Disorder.”

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She was advised by a doctor at the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) that personality disorder and anxiety disorder are very similar and that the doctor believed she suffered from anxiety disorder rather than personality disorder.  In support of her appeal, the applicant submits a copy of her DD Form 214.  She will contact the doctor to obtain a letter supporting her request to change the reason for her separation to anxiety disorder.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant entered active duty in the Air Force on 23 Oct 96.  On 2 Feb 99, the applicant’s squadron commander notified her he was recommending her discharge from the Air Force for conditions that interfere with military service, specifically, mental disorders.  The specific reason for the commander’s action was the applicant’s diagnosis on 6 Jan 99 of recurrent major depression.  The applicant acknowledged receipt on 2 Feb 99.  The applicant consulted counsel and submitted written matters in her behalf.  After considering the applicant’s presentation, the squadron commander recommended to the wing commander that the applicant be discharged for the reason stated above.  On 25 Feb 99, the wing staff judge advocate recommended the discharge authority accept the commander’s recommendation and discharge the applicant with an honorable discharge without probation and rehabilitation.  On 1 Mar 99, the discharge authority directed the applicant be discharged with an honorable discharge without offer of probation and rehabilitation when it was determined the applicant was medically qualified for separation.  The applicant was discharged on 4 Mar 99 for “Personality Disorder.”

_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial of the applicant’s request.

The applicant was administratively separated for unsuitability due to mental disorder including personality disorder.  The applicant was diagnosed by two mental health professionals with Borderline Personality Disorder based on extensive clinical information and evaluation over a period of a year, and extensive collateral occupational and marital relationship information.  The applicant indicates a DVA examiner had rendered a diagnosis of anxiety disorder; however, that evaluation is not available for review.  Therefore, it is not known what historical clinical information was considered and whether the examiner had evaluated mental health documentation from the time she was in the Air Force.  The preponderance of evidence in the records clearly supports a diagnosis of personality disorder, which rendered the applicant unsuitable for continued military service.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 20 May 05 for review and comment within 30 days.  To date, a response has not been received.

_________________________________________________________________

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 opinion and recommendation of the BCMR Medical Consultant and adopt his rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of 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_2004-01931 in Executive Session on 6 July 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 11 Jun 04, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Memorandum, BCMR Medical Consultant,
                dated 18 May 05.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 May 05.