AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

ADDENDUM TO 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

IN THE MATTER OF: 

SEP 11 1998 

DOCKET NUMBER: 96-02215 
COUNSEL:  None 
HEARING DESIRED:  No 

RESUME OF CASE: 

Applicant  had  been  administratively  discharged  under  the 
provisions  of  AFI  36-3208  with  an  entry  level  separation 
characterization  on  4  June  1996.  He  received  a  reenlistment 
eligibility (RE) code of rr2Ctt and a separation program designator 
(SPD)  code  of  r r J F X , l t  which  gave  him  a  narrative  reason  of 
IIPersonality Disorder."  He  served four months  and  25  days of 
active duty. 
In a application dated 30 July 1996, he requested the narrative 
reason for his discharge be  changed from  personality disorderll 
to a medical discharge. 

The  Board  considered  his  appeal  on  19  August  1997. The  Board 
concluded that, because the applicant was undergoing disability 
processing for his unfitting medical condition at  the same time 
he  was  being  processed  for  an  administrative  discharge  for  a 
personality  disorder  that  was  not  a  physical  disability,  he 
should have been processed as a "dual action" case in accordance 
with  AFI  36-3212.  Instead,  applicant  was  inappropriately 
administratively  separated under  the  provisions  of  AFI  36-3208 
before disability processing could be  completed.  Based on this 
and  the Air  Force's recommendations, the Board  determined that 
the applicant should be evaluated by a Medical Evaluation Board 
(MEB), a Physical Evaluation Board  (PEB), and a Formal Physical 
Evaluation Board  (FPEB) to determine his physical condition. The 
results were to be  forwarded to the Secretary of the Air Force 
Personnel Council  (SAFPC) to determine whether  applicant should 
be  administratively  discharged  or  discharged  for  his  medical 
condition. 
A complete copy of the Record of Proceedings is at Exhibit F. 
The  Board's recommendations were  implemented and, based  on the 
findings of the medical boards, on 5 March 1998, SAFPC determined 
that  the  applicant  should  be  discharged  for  his  medical 
condition. 

Copies of  the SAFPC determination as well as the medical boards 
evaluations are at Exhibit G. 

The  case  was  forwarded  to  the  Chief,  Physical  Disability 
Division, HQ AFPC/DPPD, for review.  In his evaluation, the Chief 
concurred  with  the  SAFPCIs  determination  that  the  applicant 
should be discharged under the provisions of AFI 36-3212 for his 
medical condition, which existed prior to service  (EPTS) without 
.service aggravation, and  that  the present  narrative  reason  for 
his discharge should be changed accordingly. 
A copy of the complete Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit H. 
A copy of the complete Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the 
applicant on 2  June 1998 f o r   review and comment within 30 days. 
As of this date, no response has been received by this office. 

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 
Sufficient  relevant  evidence  has  been  presented  to  demonstrate 
the  existence  of  probable  error  or  injustice. After  carefully 
considering the evidence before us, particularly the findings of 
the medical boards, we concur with the determination of SAFPC and 
HQ  AFPC/DPPD  that  the  applicant  should  not  have  been 
administratively discharged but  instead discharged  for his EPTS 
medical  condition. We  therefore  recommend  that  his  records  be 
corrected as indicated below. 

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: 

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force 
relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that: 

a.  On 3  June 1996  he was  found unfit  to perform  the duties 
of  his  office,  rank,  grade  or  rating  by  reason  of  mild 
intermittent asthma, disability rating O%,  VA Code 6602, that the 
findings were  %ot  in  the  line of  duty,I1 and  that  his medical 
condition  existed  prior  to  service  (EPTS)  without  service 
aggravation. 

b.  On  4  June  1996,  he  was  discharged  under  other  than 
Chapter 61, Title 10, U.S.C, with an entry level separation under 
the  provisions  of  AFI  36-3212,  and  that  he  was  issued  a 
separation  program  designator  code  of  llJFM1l with  a  narrative 
reason  for  separation of  "Disability, Existed  Prior  to  Service 
(EPTS) ,  PEB. 

The following members of the Board considered this application in 
Executive Session on 26 August  1998 under the provisions of AFI 
36-2603 : 

Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Panel Chair 
Mr. Michael P. Higgins, Member 
Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Member 

2 

96-02215 

All  members  voted  to correct  the  records, 
following documentary evidence was considered: 

as  recommended.  The 

Exhibit F. 
Exhibit G. 
Exhibit H. 
Exhibit  I.  AFBCMR Letter, dated 2 Jun 98. 

Record of Proceedings, dated 12 Sep 97, w/atchs. 
SAFPC Letter, dated 5 Mar 98, w/atchs. 
HQ AFPC/DPPD Letter, dated 25 Mar 98. 

-1 

Chair 

3 

9 6 - 0 2 2 1 5  

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE 

WASHINGTON, DC 

SEP 11 1998 

Office of the Assistant Secretary 
AF’BCMR 96-0221 5 

MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF 

Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction 
of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A 
Stat 116), it is directed that: 

records of the Department of the Air Force relating t 

be corrected to show that: 

a.  On 3 June 1996 he was found unfit to perform the duties of his office, rank, grade or 

rating by reason of mild intermittent asthma, disability rating O%,VA Code 6602, that the 
findings were “not in the line of duty,” and that his medical condition existed prior to service 
(EPTS) without service aggravation; 

b.  On 4 June 1996, he was discharged under other than Chapter 61, Title 10, U.S.C, 
with an entry level separation under the provisions of AFI 36-32 12, and that he was issued a 
separation program designator code of “JFM’ with a narrative reason for separation of 
“Disability, Existed Prior to Service (EPTS), PEB.” 

Director 
Air Force Review Boards Agency 

........  .. ...  .  . ....  _ .  

... \._...&  ......... 

i ' . . . .  ..... .. .. ... 

c 

-. .,. .. . . 
. ,...  . 

..  .....  .. 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

SEP  1  2  1997 

IN THE  MATTER OF: 

DOCKET NUMBER:  96-02215 
COUNSEL:  NONE 
HEARING  DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT : 
The  narrative  reason  for  his  discharge 
"personality disorder" to a medical discharge. 

be  changed  from 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT : 
The reasons the applicant believes the records to be in error or 
unjust and the evidence submitted in support of the appeal are at 
Exhibit A. 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 
The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from 
the  applicant's military  records,  are  contained  in  the  letter 
prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force  (Exhibits C 
and D).  Accordingly, there is no need to recite these facts in 
this Record of Proceedings. 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
The Medical Consultant reviewed the application and states that 
consideration  should be  granted  for  due  process.  Applicant's 
discharge  should  have; been  processed  as  a  Dual  Action  case 
through the medical disability channels pursuant to A F I   36-3212. 
The  case  should be  referred to  the  Secretary of  the Air  Force 
Personnel Council  (SAFPC)  for further consideration. 
A complete copy of  the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. 
The Chief ,  Physical Disability Division, AFPC/DPPD,  reviewed the 
application and states that applicant was in the midst of being 
processed  under  the  disability  evaluation  system  when  he  was 
inappropriately  separated  under  the  administrative  discharge 
provisions of A F I   36-3208.  A F I   36-3212, paragraph  1 . 4 . 4   states 
that disability cases on members with  an unfit  finding who  are 

APBCMMR  96-02215 

also pending an administrative separation are to be processed as 
"dual action" cases.  This means that both the administrative and 
disability cases would be processed separately and concurrently. 
Neither one, however, would be processed to completion, but once 
each  case  file  was  completed  through  to  a  recommended 
disposition, both case files would be married up at AFPC/DPPD  and 
sent  to  SAFPC  where  the  SAFPC  would  weigh  which  type  of 
separation would be more appropriate based on the merits of-each 
individual case.  I n   applicant's  case, while his disability case 
was  being  processed, Kessler  AFB  Discharge Authority  separated 
applicant under  the  administrative discharge provisions  of A F I  
36-3208,  Disability processing had just completed the Informal 
Physical Evaluation Board  (IPEB) process 
The  IPEB  recommended 
applicant be found unfit for continued military service, but that 
the condition had existed prior to entrance onto active duty and 
was  not  aggravated  by  military  service . 
The  IPEB  further 
recommended applicant be discharged under other  than disability 
law provisions.  In accordance with AFI  36-3212, paragraph  5.4, 
final disposition on the "dual action'' case could only be made by 
the SAFPC. 
Therefore a change in the record is merited in this 
They  recommend  that  the  AFBCMR  direct  AFPC/DPPD  to 
case , 
schedule  applicant  to  receive  a  current  medical  evaluation  at 
disability retired list  (TDRL) temporary duty  (TDY)  funds,  The 
further recommend that. the applicant be  granted  the opportunity 
to meet a Formal PEB  (FPEB) and allow the disability process to 
continue  to  the  appropriate  point  of  completion  as  previously 
discussed.  The final disposition will rest with the SAFPC. 
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. 

Wilford  Hall Medical  Center-, > using  temporary 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF A I R   FORCE EVALUATION: 
Complete  copies of  the Air  Force  evaluations were  forwarded to 
applicant  for  review and  response within  30 days.  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 
l a w   or regulations. 
2.  The application was timely filed. 

3.  Sufficient  relevant  evidence  has  been  presented  to 
demonstrate  the  existence  of  probable  error  or  injustice  to 
warrant  continued  processing  through  the  Air  Force  disability 
system.  After reviewing the evidence of record, we note that, in 
accordance with  AFI  36-3212, paragraph  1.4.4,  applicant's case 
should have been processed as a "dual action" case because he was 

2 

AFBCMR  96-02215 

undergoing  disability  processing  for  his  unfitting  medical 
condition  at  the  same  time  he  was  being  processed  for  an 
administrative  discharge  for  a  personality  disorder, which  was 
not  a  physical disability.  Clearly, once both  cases had been 
completed to the point of a recommended disposition, they should 
have been forwarded to the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel 
Council  (SAFPC)  to  determine which  type of separation was  most 
appropriate.  It is apparent that applicant was  inappropriately 
administratively separated under provisions of AFI 36-3208 before 
disability  processing  could  be  completed. 
In  view  of  the 
foregoing,  we  believe  that  the  most  equitable  action  f o r   the 
applicant  and  the Air  Force at  this  time is  to  afford him  the 
opportunity  to  continue  the  disability  evaluation  process. 
Therefore, we recommend the applicant's  records be  corrected to 
the  extent  indicated below.  Applicant's  request  to  change  the 
narrative  reason  for  discharge  to  a  medical  disability  was 
considered; however, we believe the recommended corrective action 
is the best approach to resolving the true status of his medical 
condition  and  also  permits  a  reevaluation  of  his  misconduct. 
Once  this  review  has  been  completed,  the  Board  will  be  in  a 
better position to render a final decision on his application. 

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: 

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force 
relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that: 
a.  He  was  issued  invitational  travel  orders  by  competent 
authority  to  Wilford  Hall  Medical  Center  for  evaluation  and 
presentation of  his  case  to  a  Medical  Evaluation  Board  (MEB), 
Physical  Evaluation Board  (PEB) and  Formal  Physical  Evaluation 
Board  (FPEB) ,  to determine his medical condition. 
b.  The results of the medical evaluation and his administrative 
discharge  case  file be  forwarded  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Air 
Force  Personnel  Council  (SAFPC) to  determine  whether  he  would 
have  been  recommended  for  an  administrative  discharge  or 
discharge for his medical condition. 
c.  The recommendation of the SAFPC be forwarded to the Air Force 
Board  for  Correction  of  Military  Records  at  the  earliest 
practicable date  so  that  all  necessary  and  appropriate  actions 
may  be completed. 

The following members of the Board considered this aDDlication in 
Executive Session on 19 August  1997, under the provisions of AFI 
3 6 - 2 6 0 3 :  

Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Panel Chairman 
Mr. William E. Edwards, Member 

3 

Mr, Richard A. Peterson, Member 
Ms , Donna Pittenger, Examiner  (without vote) 
All  members  voted  to  correct the records, as recommended. 
following documentary evidence was considered: 

The 

Exhibit A, 
Exhibit B. 
Exhibit C. 
Exhibit D. 
Exhibit E. 

DD Form 149, dated 30 J u l   96, w/atchs, 
Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 
Letter, Medical Consultant, dated 25 Jan 97. 
Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 9 Apr 97, w/atchs 
Letter, AFBCMR, dated 21 A p r   97. 

LDAVIJAf  VAN GASBECK 

Panel Chairman