RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05794 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect his reenlistment eligibility status as Eligible rather than Ineligible to allow him to reenlist. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His reenlistment status is erroneous. Throughout his military career he has never requested to be seen or sought care from a mental health provider, or received counseling or punishment for any disciplinary infraction. He was never prescribed or taken any medication for a mental health condition. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 13 Jul 02, the applicant commenced his enlistment in the Air Force Reserve. On 5 Oct 03, the applicant’s commander notified him he was referring him for a mental health evaluation and on that date the applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification. On 9 Oct 03, the applicant underwent a commander directed evaluation at the Life Skills Clinic for a determination of fitness for continued military service. The applicant was diagnosed with a Delusional Disorder, persecutory type and antisocial personality traits. The evaluation further noted the presence of a psychiatric disorder that would warrant a medical evaluation board (MEB), however, it existed prior to service. On 29 Dec 03, the applicant’s commander recommended the applicant be involuntarily discharged from the Air Force Reserve for a condition that interfered with his military service. The specific reason for the discharge action was the applicant’s diagnosis of Delusional Disorder, persecutory type and antisocial personality traits. The psychiatrist noted the applicant’s condition as being so severe that his ability to function effectively in a military environment was significantly impaired and that he was unsuited for further military service. In the notification for discharge, the commander cited the following derogatory information: the applicant received three Letters of Reprimand (LOR) for dereliction of duty, being disrespectful to a commissioned officer, failure to meet training standards and dereliction of duty, Unfavorable Information File (UIF), and two Memorandums For Record (MFR). On 13 Nov 03, the applicant was directed not to attend Unit Training Assemblies (UTA), Annual Tour, or to perform duty in any other pay and/or point status pending resolution of the discharge action. On 4 Jun 04, the legal office reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient to support separation and recommended the case be forwarded to the discharge authority for action. On 9 Aug 04, the applicant was forwarded the notification for initiation of separation action by certified mail. The applicant was further advised that a failure to reply would constitute a waiver of his rights. On 31 May 05, the discharge authority concurred with the commander’s recommendation and directed the applicant be furnished an honorable discharge without probation and rehabilitation and the applicant was so discharged on 17 Jun 05. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFCC/SG recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. After reviewing the documentation it appears the applicant was discharged after psychiatric evaluation for an Axis 1 diagnosis in accordance with all applicable guidance. The case was found to be legally sufficient, and the medical documentation substantiated the diagnosis. Axis 1 diagnoses were at that time and still are disqualifying for continued military service. The applicant was appropriately discharged and coded for no reenlistment based on his condition. A complete copy of the AFRC/SG evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reiterates he has never requested any psychiatric counseling or evaluation. He believes an incorrect diagnosis was received. He has never experienced any of the symptoms associated with an Axis 1 condition. He was never notified of the diagnosis or prescribed any medications relating to the diagnosis. He has been under the care of the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) since 2001. His primary care provider since 2009 has provided a statement indicating the applicant has not and does not have an Axis 1 diagnosis or any symptoms that would require a mental health consultation. A statement was provided from the DVA stating the applicant is not receiving monetary benefits, does not have a pending claim and does not have any service connected disabilities. The applicant’s complete response, with attachments is at 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 an error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission, to include his rebuttal, in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice. The applicant has presented no evidence of an error or injustice that occurred in the discharge process or the assignment of the contested enlistment eligibility factor. He has provided no evidence which would lead us to believe his discharge was improper or contrary to the provisions of the governing directive, or the reenlistment eligibility factor issued in conjunction with it was erroneous or inappropriately assigned. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief. 4. The applicant’s case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2013-05794 in Executive Session on 2 Dec 14 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 16 Dec 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFRC/SG, dated 18 Feb 14. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 May 14. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, undated, w/atchs.