RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:				DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-03733
INDEX CODE:  112.10 
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX			     COUNSEL: NONE

XXX-XX-XXXX					HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  11 June 2006

______________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

Her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code, separation code, and narrative reason for separation be changed to enable her to reenter the military.

______________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her medical condition was misdiagnosed.  The symptoms she experienced were due to a rash, an ovarian cyst, and appendicitis, not bipolar disorder.  

In support of her application, the applicant provided a personal statement; a copy of her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty; a copy of her Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) evaluation and findings; medical reports; Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) rating decision; and several reference letters.  The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

______________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 26 April 2000, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force at the age of 19 in the grade of airman basic (E-1) for a period of four years.  Following her successful completion of basic military training, the applicant was trained as a Security Forces Apprentice.  She was progressively promoted to the grade of airman first class (E-2) with a date of rank of 9 June 2000.

In January 2002, the applicant was diagnosed with Bipolar Disorder based on active symptoms consistent with mania.  The diagnosis was confirmed by both a civilian psychiatrist and a Navy psychiatrist.  On 26 April 2002, her commander recommended the applicant be separated from service based on her long-term medical condition because she was unable to perform her duties as a security forces member and could not deploy.

On 29 April 2002, the applicant’s records met a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB).  The MEB diagnosed the applicant with Bipolar I Disorder, recent manic episode, moderate; determined the applicant’s condition was incurred while in the line of duty and entitled to basic pay, and referred her case for presentation to the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB).  The IPEB findings, dated 8 May 2002, stated the applicant was unfit because of physical disability incurred in the line of duty and recommended discharge with severance pay with a disability rating of 10% in accordance with DoD and VASRD guidelines.  On 10 May 2002, the applicant agreed with the findings and recommendation of the board and consequently, on 20 May 2002, the Secretary of the Air Force approved the recommendation of the IPEB and directed she be discharged with severance pay and a separation code “JFL” (disability, severance pay).  

On 28 June 2002, the applicant was honorably discharged with an RE code of 2Q, (Personnel medically retired or discharged), a separation code of JFL, and a narrative reason for separation of disability, severance pay.  She had served two years, two months and three days on active duty.  The applicant received separation pay in the amount of $5,541.60.

A DVA Rating Decision, dated 19 September 2002, denied the applicant’s claim for service connection for Bipolar Disorder because there was no evidence of a current condition.

______________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant is of the opinion that no change in the applicant’s records is warranted.  The BCMR Medical Consultant states that review of the applicant’s medical records finds no temporal link of her skin or abdominal condition to the onset or severity of her psychological symptoms.  Evidence of record clearly supports the diagnosis of Bipolar Disorder Type I rendered by an Air Force psychologist, a civilian psychiatrist, and a Navy psychiatrist.  Bipolar Disorder is disqualifying for entry into military service, continued military service and for reentry into military service even if in remission.  The fact that she is doing well now does not prove she did not experience mental illness characterized by mania consistent with the diagnosis of Bipolar Disorder.  

It is the BCMR Medical Consultant’s opinion that action and disposition in this case are proper and equitable reflecting compliance with Air Force directives that implement the law.  The BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C.

______________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

In spite of the Air Force advisory opinion, she still contends she does not have Bipolar Disorder and the symptoms she was having, while on active duty, were due to the abdominal problems she was having.  She is not blaming the military in any way for not giving her the proper treatment and not diagnosing her physical problem before it became a major problem.  She just wants her military record corrected so she can have the opportunity to serve her country again.  The applicant’s rebuttal is at Exhibit D.

______________________________________________________________

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 probable error or injustice.  Evidence has not been provided which would lead us to believe the applicant was improperly separated because of physical disability.  The record clearly shows that her separation had its basis in symptoms that created sufficient doubt concerning her fitness for duty to warrant disability processing.  Following a medical workup and reviews by the Medical Board and the IPEB, it was determined that she was unfit to perform her duties.  As a result, her separation for disability was required by the governing regulation, which implements the law.  Accordingly, we find the RE and SPD codes and the narrative reason for separation that was issued at the time of the applicant’s separation accurately reflects the circumstances of her separation, and we do not find these codes to be in error or unjust.  In addition, we have seen no evidence indicating she was not afforded all rights to which entitled during her disability processing.  In view of the foregoing, and absent persuasive evidence indicating the reports of the applicant’s symptoms and their affects on her ability to perform her duties were erroneous, or a showing the governing regulations were either violated or not based on accepted medical principles, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the AFBCMR Medical Consultant and find that the applicant has not sustained her burden for providing a showing of error or injustice.  Accordingly, her request is not favorably considered.

______________________________________________________________

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 this application in Executive Session on 14 December 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2004-03733:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 24 Nov 04, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 13 Oct 05.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Oct 05.
    Exhibit E.  Applicant’s Rebuttal, not dated.