RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-04399

(b) (6), (b) (7)(C) 	
(AKA)
(b) (6), (b) (7)(C) 	

COUNSEL:	NONE HEARING DESIRED:	NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
1.	Her narrative reason for separation of “Personality Disorder” be changed.

2.	Her “2C” (Involuntary Separation) be changed.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
She made a hasty decision when she decided to separate from the military. She was caught up in the party lifestyle when she experienced personal tragedy. She did not think she was strong enough to get through it. She quickly said “yes” to receive an honorable discharge as long as she kept her GI Bill. Shortly thereafter, she married an Air Force officer; they were married for 18 years and have two sons together. Within three years of discharge, she finished her Bachelor’s and Master’s degrees, with honors. Within four years of discharge, she worked for the State of California as an investigator, and for the last 8 years she has worked for the Department of Defense Army Air Force Exchange. She is applying for a new position at the Department of the Army Child Care Youth Services but is concerned about the “2C” RE code, which she believes it has a stigma and can be detrimental. She has never been arrested or engaged in any illegal activities.

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 5 June 1991.

On 10 January 1994, the applicant was notified by her commander that he was recommending her for discharge for Conditions That Interfere with Military Service; specifically, adjustment disorder. The reason for this action was that the commander received a report with a medical diagnosis that the applicant has

(b) (6), (b) (7)(C) 	

a mental disorder contained in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders (DSM-III-R); specifically adjustment disorder with mixed disturbance of emotions and conduct and a borderline personality disorder that is so severe that the applicant’s ability to function effectively in the military is significantly impaired. The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification and was advised of her right to consult with legal counsel and submit statements in her own behalf. After the base legal office reviewed the package, they found it legally sufficient to support separation. The discharge authority approved the separation and directed the applicant be discharged with an honorable service characterization.

On 28 January 1994, the applicant was furnished an honorable discharge with a narrative reason for separation of “PERSONALITY DISORDER,” and corresponding separation code (SPD) of “JFX. She was credited with 2 years, 7 months, and 24 days of active service.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memoranda prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibit C and D.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DP2STM-SEP recommends denial stating that the applicant has not filed a timely petition. It has been approximately 22 years since the applicant’s discharge from the Air Force and there was no reason given for not submitting a timely application within three years of the alleged error or injustice. Based on a review of the master of personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. They found no evidence of an error or injustice in the applicant’s discharge processing. The applicant’s service characterization is also correct as indicated on her DD Form 214. The commander recommended an honorable service characterization which was approved by the base separations authority.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DP2STM-SEP evaluation is at Exhibit C.
The Psychiatric Consultant opines that there is justification to have the reason for separation changed to Secretarial Authority and the SPD code changed to JFF (a service initiated discharge directed by established directive, when the separation is by order of the Military Department Secretary). In addition, the Reentry (RE) code could then be changed to “2K” (formally notified of involuntary separation). The applicant is requesting a change in her reason for separation which was listed as Personality Disorder. Yet, her Psychiatrist diagnosed her with Adjustment Disorder in all of the notes. There was a notation in the discharge note from her last hospital stay suggesting a diagnosis of  Borderline

Personality Disorder, however, that note was based on a brief two- day stay and one of the diagnostic features of all Personality Disorders is that it has been an enduring pattern of long duration, so a brief hospitalization without notes reflecting a pattern over time would not support this diagnosis.

According Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) IV, the diagnosis of Personality Disorder is an enduring pattern of inner experience and behavior that deviates markedly from the expectations of the individual’s culture. This pattern is manifested in two (or more) of the following areas:

1.	Cognition (i.e., ways of perceiving and interpreting self, other people, and events)
2.	Affectivity	(i.e.,	range,	intensity,	lability,	and appropriateness of emotional response)
3.	Interpersonal functioning
4.	Impulse control
The enduring pattern is inflexible and pervasive across a broad range of personal and social situations. The enduring pattern leads to clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning. The pattern is stable and of long duration and its onset can be traced back at least to adolescence or early adulthood. The enduring pattern is not better accounted for as a manifestation or consequence of another mental disorder. The enduring pattern is not due to the direct physiological effects of a substance (e.g., a drug of abuse, a medication) or a general medical condition (e.g., head trauma). To give a diagnosis of a Personality Disorder, the evaluator would have to demonstrate that the condition has the above noted attributes.

Adjustment disorder is the development of emotional or behavioral symptoms in response to an identifiable stressor(s) occurring within 3 months of the onset of the stressor(s). This occurs where the symptoms or behaviors are clinically significant as evidenced by either of the following:

1.	Marked distress that is in excess of what would be expected from exposure to the stressor or
2.	Significant impairment in social or occupational (academic) functioning.

It appears evident that the applicant did not meet the criteria for Personality Disorder. She had no reported history of dysfunction prior to the military. She was not inflexible as demonstrated in her ability to learn new coping strategies from the Social Worker who worked with her. There is no history of substance abuse or a general medical condition and she does clearly meet the criteria for adjustment disorder.

The applicant struggled in her social life as demonstrated by the conflicts and abuse she endured in her marital relationship. This strife interfered as well with her occupational functioning as demonstrated in her EPR scores and was manifested emotionally in her suicide gestures, anxiety, and depression, which were clearly over the top. At the time of the applicant’s service in the military (1991-1994), the Air Force included the diagnosis of Adjustment Disorder under the category of Mental Disorders 5.11.9 where a recommendation for discharge must be supported by a report of evaluation by a Psychiatrist or PhD-level clinical psychologist, who confirms the diagnosis. A further condition for discharge due to a mental disorder is that the professional evaluator must find the disorder so severe that the “member’s ability to function effectively in the military environment is significantly impaired.”

Adjustment Disorder, up until the year 2013, was a medical condition that was a non-compensable disability. This rule has since changed and now there is a distinction between an Acute Adjustment Disorder, a condition that lasted less than 6 months and a Chronic Adjustment Disorder, the same presenting condition, which lasts longer than six months. The acute condition is still non-ratable for compensation and is still basis for administrative discharge. In the case of the chronic condition, it is compensable and would be processed by the Disability Evaluation System (DES) under the revised authority of AFI 36-3208. The applicant was discharged in 1994, so she falls under the older classification. Consequently, her discharge was just but the error was the reason for d ischarge, which should have been Adjustment Disorder.  There is one further change to her DD Form
214 which can be done. It seems most unfortunate that this applicant should have to continue to endure the negativity from her previous record considering the excellent performance in her post service years. From the record presented by the applicant and the paper record presented in support of it, there is clear evidence that the applicant has lived up to the high values and military code of the Air Force. She attended college and received honors both in a Bachelor’s program and a Master’s program. She has no violations of law or social norms and continues to work and life a productive life. Clearly, this lifestyle would support a further change in her record. Under these circumstances, the reason for separation can be changed to Secretarial Authority and the SPD code changed to JFF. In addition, her RE code could then be changed 2K.

A complete copy of the BCMR Psychiatric Advisor’s evaluation is at Exhibit D.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 3 March and 6 March 2017 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibits E and F). As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

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.	Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice regarding correction of the applicant’s separation code and narrative reason for separation. In this regard, we note that AFPC/DP2STM-SEP indicates relief should be denied because they found no error or injustice in the applicant’s discharge processing. However, since the applicant was actually diagnosed with “Adjustment Disorder,” as noted by the Psychiatric Advisor, but was discharged with a narrative reason of “Personality Disorder,” we believe it is in the interest of justice to change the separation code to a more favorable code of “JFF” and narrative reason of “Secretarial Authority.” Further, we note the Psychiatric Advisor also recommends the applicant’s RE code be changed to 2K, we agree. Accordingly, it is our opinion that her records should be corrected as indicated below.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show that she was discharged on 28 January 1994 with a narrative reason for separation of “Secretarial Authority,” a separation code of “JFF,” and a Reentry (RE) code of “2K.”

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-04399 in Executive Session on 16 May 2017 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

Ms. Marcia Jane Bachman, Panel Chair Mr. James J. Brooks, Member
Ms. Mercedes C. Fitchett, Member

All members voted to correct the records as recommended. The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-04399 was considered:

Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 7 Oct 15, w/atchs. Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C.	Memorandum, AFPC/DP2STM-SEP, dated 2 May 16. Exhibit D.	Memorandum, BCMR Psychiatric Advisor,
dated 6 Feb 17.
Exhibit E.	Letter, AFBCMR, dated 3 Mar 17. Exhibit F.	Letter, AFBCMR, dated 6 Mar 17.

Pursuant to paragraph 1 of AFI 36-2603 (Title 32 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 865.1), it is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled matter.
12/5/2017

X

(b) 	 (6),

(b)

(b) (6), (b) (7) 	
(ACss)oc(ia7t)e Director, AFBCMR Signed(Cb)y: