. 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AUG  1 4  5998 

IN THE MATTER OF: 

DOCKET NO: 98-00034 

HEARING DESIRED: Yes 

- 

Applicant requests that his reason for discharge  (Conditions that 
Interfere w/Mili tary Service-Not Disability-Personali ty Disorder) 
and his reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of rr2Crr (Involuntarily 
Separated under AFR  39-10 w/Hmorable Discharge) be upgraded to a 
classification  more  indicative  of  his  character.  [Applicant 
apparently obtained a waiver of his RE  code and is a sergeant in 
the  Army  Reserves.]  Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A. 
The appropriate  Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request 
and  provided  advisory  opinions  to  the  Board  recommending  the 
application be  denied  (Exhibit C).  The advisory opinions were 
forwarded  to  the  applicant  and  his  counsel  for  review  and 
response  (Exhibit D).  As  of  this date, no  response  has  been 
received by this office. 
We  note  that  the  Air  Force  Discharge  Review  Bard  (AFDRB) 
considered  and  denied  a  similar  request.  After  careful 
consideration of applicant's request and the available evidence 
of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to 
warrant corrective action.  The facts and opinions stated in the 
advisory opinion and the brief prepared by the AFDRB appear to be 
based  on the evidence of  record and have not  been  sufficiently 
rebutted  by  applicant's counsel.  Absent  persuasive  evidence 
applicant  was  denied  rights  to  which  entitled,  appropriate 
regulations were not followed, or appropriate standards were not 
applied, we find no basis to disturb the existing record. 
Accordingly, applicant's request is denied. 
--- 
The documentation provided with this case was sufficient to give 
the  Board  a  clear  understanding  of  the  issues  involved  and  a 
personal  appearance, with  or without  legal  counsel, would  not 
have  materially  added  to  that  understanding.  Therefore,  the 
request for a hearing is not favorably considered. 
The Board staff is directed to inform applicant of this decision. 
Applicant should also be informed that this decision is final and 
will only be  reconsidered upon the presentation of new relevant 
evidence  which  was  not  reasonably  available  at  the  time  the 
application was filed. 

Members  of  the Board  Ms. Martha Maust,  Mr.  Richard  A.  Peterson, 
and  Mr.  Patrick  R.  Wheeler  considered  this  application  on 
4 August  1998  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  Air  Force 
Instruction 36-2603, and the governing 

statute, 10, U.S.C. 1552. 

A n e l  Chair / 

Exhibits : 
A.  Applicant's DD Form 149 
B.  Available Master Personnel-  Records 
C.  Advisory Opinions 
D.  AFBCMR Ltrs Forwarding Advisory Opinions 

DEPARTMENT OF T H E  A I R   FORCE 

H E A D Q U A R T E R S  AIR  FORCE  P E R S O N N E L  CENTER 

R A N D O L P H  AIR  FORCE  BASE TEXAS 

MEMORANDUM FOR  ’ AFBCMR 
FROM:  HQ AFPCDPPAES 

550 C Street West Ste 10 
Randolph AFB TX  78 150-47 12 

1 6  JAN= 

A review of applicant’s case file was conducted.  The Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) 

Code “2C” is correct.  n e  type of discharge drove assignment of the RE code. 

Special Programs and BCMR Manager 
Dir of Personnel Program Management 

9800034 

i 

10 February 1998 

Memorandum for the AFBCMR 

From:  BCMR Medical Consultant 

4535 Command Drive, EE Wing, 3rd Floor 
Andrews AFB MD' 20762-7002 

Applicant's entire case file has been reviewed and is forwarded with the following findings, 

conclusions and recommendations. 

REQUESTED ACTION:  The applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-10 

on 16 August 1985 after 8 months and 13 days on active duty after being diagnosed with a 
personality disorder.  He now applies requesting the records be changed to show a different 
reason for discharge and a change in his reenlistment code "to a classification more indicative 
of (his) character", 

FACTS:  The records indicate the applicant began his duties as a medical administrative 

FB in April 1985, and almost from the onset had difficulties with 
specialist at 
interpersonal communication and interactions. A well-documented history of counseling 
sessions is found along with memoranda for record that detail his on-going difficulties and lack 
of interest in his duties.  He was commander-referred for a mental health evaluation on 15 July 
1985 that resulted in the diagnosis of "atypical personality disorder with narcissistic and schizoid 
features" which interfered with his military dutiesltraining and he was discharged because of the 
medical condition.  He was 21 years old at the time. 

Since his discharge, he has been waivered for service in the Army reserve which continues 
to this day, and has received several promotions and has numerous letters supporting his 
exemplary performance in both civilian and military sectors.  A brief visit on 27 June 1988 with a 
consulting psychiatrist during his Army application process reported: "At this interview applicant 
is not domineering nor aggressive nor narcissistic.  He manifests no psychiatric or 
psychological disorder". 

The applicant had previously submitted an application to the BCMR in June 1986 for record 

correction, but this apparently was not acted upon in lieu of first being considered by the 
SAFPC Discharge Review Board,  He applied for this review in June 1986, also, but withdrew 
his request for a personal appearance before the Board in April 3987.  A request for a non- 
personal appearance DRB review was submitted on 15 December 1996, nine years later, and 
his case was reviewed on 21 November 1997, denying his request for a change of reason for 
discharge. 

DISCUSSION:  This case contains strong documentation that the applicant was not able to 
function in his work environment in his initial duty assignment and that little effort was expended 
on his part to correct the problem.  He reportedly antagonized almost everyone with whom he 
interacted, on occasion correcting higher ranking personnel in inappropriate circumstances (Le. , 
promotion ceremonies).  The diagnosis of personality disorder was made by competent medicai 
authority, apparently in a single interview session.  While such diagnoses are most commonly 

Page 2 (Cont’d) 
made after lengthier periods of observation, nothing precludes arriving at the diagnosis in a 
single interview setting, particularly with appropriate supplementary information provided from 
other informants (e.g., his supervisors).  He was properly evaluated by the evidence of record. 
There is no evidence of error or irregularity in the processing of this case.  Action and 
disposition in this case are proper and reflect compliance with Air Force directives which 
implement the law. 

AFBCMR Case # 9840034 

RECOMMENDATION: The Medical Consultant is of the opinion that no change in the 

records is warranted and the application should be denied. 

REDERICK W. HORNICK, Col., USAF, MC, FS 
Chief Medical Consultant, AFBCMR 
Medical Advisor SAF Personnel Council 

9800034 
. . . . . - -  . . .  -  ._ 

. 

..