RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00285 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her general (under honorable conditions) be upgraded to a medical or honorable discharge. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Her discharge was entirely due to a misdiagnosis of bipolar mental disorder. In August 2007, she entered therapy for her stressors; however, the doctors were treating the wrong diagnosis of major depression. The two diagnoses are treated differently. Bipolar Disorder has a higher risk of adverse behaviors, suicidal attempts, as well as a disregard for anything positive. If she would have been diagnosed correctly, the behaviors would have been corrected and the discharge probably would not have happened. In support of the appeal, the applicant provides copies of her master personnel records. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant enlisted in the Air Force on 15 July 2003. On 4 February 2008, she was notified of her commander’s intent to discharge her from the Air Force for Misconduct, Minor Disciplinary Infractions. Specifically, she received two Article 15s, three Letters of Reprimand, one Letter of Counseling and two Memorandums for Record. The applicant acknowledged her right to consult counsel; which she did. She declined to submit a statement in her behalf. On 8 February 2008, the case was found legally sufficient. On 23 February 2008, the Commander directed she be discharged for Minor Disciplinary Infractions and Drug Abuse in accordance with AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen and AFPD 36-32, Military Separations and Retirements. She received a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. She was credited with serving 4 years, 7 months and 12 days of active duty. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial. DPSOS states the applicant did not submit evidence or identify any errors or injustice in the processing of her separation. The applicant’s discharge, to include her narrative reason for separation, was appropriately administered. The complete DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit C. The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial. The BCMR Medical Consultant states that in order for the applicant to receive a medical discharge, she would require the presence of a medical condition that interfered with her ability to perform military service to the point that rendered her non-worldwide qualified. The applicant’s recurrent failures to report to duty at the prescribed time were not diagnostic of or indicative of a mental deficit. Had the applicant been found unfit due to a mental disorder, she would have been concurrently the subject of an involuntary discharge and a medical discharge, and still vulnerable for a “dual action” review by the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council. The fact that the applicant has been diagnosed with a mental disorder since leaving military service does not invalidate the clinical assessments or their severity during her military service. Additionally, the applicant’s self-reported marijuana use carries a mandatory involuntary separation. The BCMR Medical Consultant opines the applicant has not proven an error or injustice occurred that warrants a change in her narrative reason for separation. The complete BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 22 September 2011, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). As of this date, this office has received no response. ________________________________________________________________ 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 an error or injustice. After careful consideration of the applicant’s request and the evidence presented, we are not persuaded that the approved service characterization should be upgraded. It appears that responsible officials applied appropriate standards in effecting the separation, and the applicant has not provided persuasive evidence demonstrating that pertinent regulations were violated; she was not afforded all the rights to which entitled at the time of discharge; or that her superiors abused their discretionary authority. We therefore agree with the recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and the BCMR Medical Consultant and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Accordingly, we find no 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-00285 in Executive Session on 1 November 2011, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to BCMR Docket Number BC-2011-00285 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dtd 24 Jan 11, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dtd 22 Mar 11. Exhibit D. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dtd 20 Sep 11. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dtd 22 Sep 11. Panel Chair