RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01659 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His narrative reason for separation “Personality Disorder” be 
changed to “medical retirement.” 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He was discharged under medical conditions which should warrant a 
re-characterization of his separation. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of his 
DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active 
Duty, and separation documents. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 27 Mar 01, the applicant entered active duty in the Regular 
Air Force. He served as a tactical aircraft maintenance 
journeyman, and his highest grade held was senior airman. 

 

On 12 Aug 04, the applicant was notified by his squadron 
commander that he was recommending his discharge from the Air 
Force for a condition that interfered with military service, 
specifically a mental disorder. 

 

In a memorandum dated 11 Aug 04, from the Chief, Life Skills 
Support Center (LSSC), indicated the applicant reported to the 
LSSC, for a walk-in appointment on 3 Aug 04, as directed by a 
medical official of the Inpatient Psychiatry Services Department, 
following his treatment and hospitalization for a suicide attempt 
on 30 Jul 04. The LSSC report recommended the applicant be 
administratively separated based on his “affective instability, 
intermittent suicidal urges, and impulsivity,” which was further 
substantiated by a diagnosis of “Adjustment Disorder with 
Depressed Mood.” 

 

On 12 Aug 04, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the discharge 
notification and, his counsel submitted a statement on his 
behalf. 


 

The base legal office found the case legally sufficient to 
support the basis for discharge. On 27 Aug 04, the discharge 
authority approved the discharge with service characterized as 
honorable. 

 

On 9 Sep 04, the applicant was honorably discharged by reason of 
Personality Disorder, after serving on active duty for a period 
of three years, seven months, and five days. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial. The Medical 
Consultant states the conditions for which the applicant was 
released from military service are not considered conditions that 
qualify for processing as a disability under the provisions of 
AFI 36-3212, Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, and 
Separation. The applicant’s Adjustment Disorder and Personality 
Disorder are considered unsuitable or unsuiting for military 
service and would not warrant processing via a Medical Evaluation 
Board and subsequent Physical Evaluation Board. 

 

The Board should be aware that at or about the time of the 
applicant’s discharge date, the term “Personality Disorder” was 
the default diagnosis that appeared on a member’s DD Form 214 
when discharged for an unsuitable mental disorder, whether a 
Personality Disorder or Adjustment Disorder. Due in part to 
acknowledgement of the distinct differences between the two and 
the likely greater detriment to an individual’s post-service 
social and occupational opportunities if errantly labeled a 
Personality Disorder, the Department of Defense assigned 
Adjustment Disorder its own separation program Designator (SPD) 
code so that such distinctions can be made in the official 
discharge documents when appropriate. In the case under review, 
both mental disorders are listed as diagnoses (pl.). Indeed, the 
evaluating inpatient provider recommended separation based on 
“affective instability, intermittent suicidal urges, and 
impulsivity,” which in the memorandum from the Air Force provider 
indicates the “discharge [was] further substantiated by a [co-
morbid] diagnosis of Adjustment Disorder with Depressed Mood. 

 

The Medical Consultant states the case file contains no evidence 
of a medical condition qualifying for review as a compensable 
disorder warranting a “medical” separation or retirement. The 
consultant concludes the applicant has not met the burden of 
proof of an error or injustice that warrants the desired change 
of the record. 

 

The complete BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit 
C. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

On 28 Oct 11, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to 
the applicant for review and comment within 30 days. To date, a 
response has not been received (Exhibit D). 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 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-2011-01659 in Executive Session on 13 Dec 11, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 

The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number 
BC-2011-01659 was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 24 Mar 11, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 19 Oct 11. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Oct 11.