RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS



IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  00-01577
                 INDEX CODE:  108.04

                 COUNSEL:  NONE

                 HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her general  (under  honorable  conditions)  discharge  by  reason  of
misconduct be changed to discharge by reason of physical disability.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She was given the Air Force Good Conduct Medal.  She had a  hard  time
adjusting to the military and sought counseling for it.  She  suffered
from a dysthymic disorder.  Because of her disability and  the  demand
of the military, she faced many challenges, which  often  resulted  in
trouble.  For each mistake she made, she has paid for with punishment.

In support of her appeal, the applicant submits  copies  of  the  five
character statements she submitted to her commander at the time of her
discharge and copies of the Department of Veteran Affairs (DVA) rating
decision.

Applicant’s submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On her entrance exam for the Regular Air Force, dated 19 January 1996,
the applicant noted that she had been treated for a  mental  condition
(behavioral counseling) from the age of  nine  for  four  years.   She
enlisted on 15 February 1996, for a period of four (4)  years  in  the
grade of E-1.

On 5 March 1996, the applicant was  referred  by  her  basic  training
supervisor to the Wilford Hall Medical Center for  evaluation.   On  6
March 1996, she was diagnosed with adjustment disorder with  depressed
mood.  They recommended return to duty.

The applicant was promoted to the grade  of  E-3,  effective  10  July
1997.  She received an  overall  “3”  evaluation  on  the  performance
report closing 14 October 1997 and an overall “4” evaluation  for  the
performance report closing 14 October 1998.

On 6 May 1999, a telephone consultation from  her  treating  physician
indicated the applicant was doing well  and  her  work  situation  was
going well.  She was  diagnosed  with  controlled  dysthymia  and  was
prescribed  Prozac.   On  18  June  1999,  a  telephone   consultation
indicated that processing for a medical board was  discussed  for  her
dysthymia diagnosis.  The record of medical care also  indicated  that
the applicant was in agreement with the process; hoped it  would  work
quickly for her; and that  she  was  still  having  a  difficult  time
dealing with her situation.

On 3 August 1999, the applicant’s commander notified her of his intent
to  recommend  her  discharge  for  misconduct   (minor   disciplinary
infractions).  His reasons  were:   (1)  On  24  June  1999,  she  was
disrespectful to a superior NCO, for which she received an Article 15;
(2) On 9 June 1999, she was disrespectful to a superior NCO, for which
she received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR); (3) On 13 May 1999, she  was
disrespectful to her supervisor, for which she received an LOR; (4) On
29 June 1998, she behaved unprofessionally in an  office  environment,
and on 6 July  1998,  she  was  not  prepared  to  review  her  Career
Development Course (CDC) material with her supervisor, for  which  she
received a Letter of Counseling (LOC); and (5) On 2 December 1996, she
assaulted two airmen by striking them with her hand and  was  derelict
in the performance of her duties by consuming alcohol  while  she  was
under the legal age limit, for which she received an Article 15.

On  3  August  1999,  the  applicant  acknowledged  receipt   of   the
notification.  On 9 August 1999,  the  commander  initiated  discharge
action, noting that she had displayed a severe lack  of  self-control,
discipline, and integrity and  that  all  rehabilitative  efforts  had
failed to deter her from her callous behavior.  He added that she  had
clearly demonstrated she did not possess the attributes and  restraint
to be a productive member of the Air  Force.   He  did  not  recommend
probation and rehabilitation.

On 19 August 1999, the discharge action was found  legally  sufficient
to support the commander’s recommendation to  separate  the  applicant
with  a  general  (under  honorable  conditions)  discharge,   without
probation and rehabilitation.

The applicant  was  subsequently  discharged  with  a  general  (under
honorable  conditions)  discharge  on  27  August  1999,   under   the
provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Misconduct).  She was assigned an  RE  code
of 2X (First-term, second-term, or career airman  considered  but  not
selected for reenlistment under  the  Selective  Reenlistment  Program
(SRP)).  She served 3 years, 6 months and 13 days on active duty.

In a rating  decision,  dated  18  January  2000,  the  Department  of
Veterans  Affairs  (DVA)  granted  service  connection  for  dysthymic
disorder, rated at  50%,  effective  28  August  1999;  and  bilateral
maxillary, ethmoidal and sphenoidal sinusitis, rated at 10%, effective
28 August 1999.  Service connection for allergic rhinitis was  denied.


The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted
from the applicant's military records, are contained  in  the  letters
prepared by the appropriate offices of the  Air  Force.   Accordingly,
there is no need to recite these facts in this Record of Proceedings.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

The BCMR Medical Consultant states that the applicant entered the  Air
Force on 15 February 1996, and, within a  week,  was  seen  by  mental
health providers because of an  “adjustment  disorder  with  depressed
mood” and was seen on several other occasions while in basic  training
with the same diagnosis.  This was  not  felt  significant  enough  to
warrant  separation  even  though  she  had  identified  psychological
problems on her admission medical history and had received a  civilian
consultation prior to being accepted for service.  The fact  that  her
entire three years in the Air Force were marked by problems attest  to
the life-long pattern she brought when she enlisted.  It appears  that
the applicant should have been given an entry-level separation for her
adjustment disorder which would have precluded the  course  she  later
followed that led to her general  discharge.   Records  indicate  that
consideration was given to initiating medical  board  action  for  the
dysthymia, but no record of a board is found in  her  service  medical
records.  The intent to  conduct  a  medical  evaluation  board  (MEB)
should have been followed through, where the  likely  outcome  of  the
disability evaluation would have been a recommendation for  separation
with severance pay and a 0% disability based on an  actual  disability
of 10% per VASRD code 9433,  Dysthymic  Disorder,  mild,  with  a  10%
deduction taken for the fact that this condition existed prior to  her
enlistment.  She would likely have still received  the  same  type  of
administrative discharge following dual-action  consideration  as  she
had the capacity of choosing right from wrong but chose to pursue  the
latter in spite of counseling and treatment over her  three  years  of
service.

The Medical Consultant is of the opinion that no change in the records
is warranted and the application should be  denied.   A  copy  of  the
evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

The Chief, Special Actions/BCMR Advisories, USAF  Physical  Disability
Division, HQ AFPC/DPPD,  states  that  eligibility  for  processing  a
member through the military disability evaluation system is determined
by an MEB when he or she is found medically disqualified for continued
military service.  The decision to conduct  an  MEB  is  made  by  the
medical treatment facility providing health care to the  member.   The
medical aspects of the case are fully explained by  the  BCMR  Medical
Consultant, and DPPD agrees with his evaluation.  Their review of  the
records revealed comments by  the  Chief  of  Counseling  Services  at
Brooks AFB on 18 June 1999, which makes reference to  the  possibility
of conducting an MEB for her dysthymia diagnosis.  Records  also  show
that her mental disorder improved to the point  where  she  no  longer
required medications.  This is confirmed in a statement from the Chief
of Medical Staff, Brooks AFB, in a character statement for the  member
completed in July 1999.  A DD Form 2697, Report of Medical Assessment,
completed just prior to her administrative discharge does not  include
any serious medical condition which would  qualify  her  for  entrance
into the  military  disability  evaluation  system.   A  copy  of  the
evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on
8 September 2000, for review and response within 30 days (Exhibit  E).
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 timely filed.

3.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of probable error  or  injustice  to  warrant  changing  the
applicant’s record to reflect she was discharged by reason of physical
disability.  While we share the BCMR Medical Consultant’s belief  that
the applicant should have been given an entry-level separation for her
adjustment disorder, or, she should  have  met  a  Medical  Evaluation
Board (MEB), where the likely outcome  of  the  disability  evaluation
would have been a recommendation for separation with severance pay for
a diagnosis of mild Dysthymic Disorder, VASRD code 9433, rated at  10%
(with a 10% deduction because the condition existed prior to service),
we disagree with his recommendation that the  application  be  denied.
Even  though  the  applicant  may  have  received  an   administrative
discharge following dual action consideration, we believe her  lengthy
history of psychological problems since before her enlistment warrants
a different conclusion.  Since  the  Air  Force  was  aware  that  the
applicant was bringing with her a history of  psychological  problems,
she should not have been penalized for her misconduct with  a  general
discharge.  Therefore, we recommend that  the  applicant’s  record  be
corrected to the extent 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 26 August 1999, she was found unfit to perform the duties
of her  office,  rank,  grade  or  rating  by  reason  of  a  physical
disability;  that  the  diagnosis  in  her  case  was  mild  Dysthymic
Disorder, VASRD Code 9433, rated at 10 percent;  that  the  disability
existed prior to service without service  aggravation;  and  that  the
disability was permanent.

      b.  She was honorably discharged on 27 August  1999,  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-3212 by reason of a  physical  disability,  which
existed prior to service, without entitlement to disability  severance
pay.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the  Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 26 October 2000, under the provisions of  AFI 36-
2603:

                 Mr. Henry Romo, Jr., Panel Chair
                 Mr. Laurence M. Groner, Member
                 Mr. John E. Pettit, Member

All members  voted  to  correct  the  records,  as  recommended.   The
following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 8 July 00, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 31 July 00.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 25 August 00.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 6 September 00.




                                   HENRY ROMO, JR.
                                   Panel Chair



AFBCMR 00-01577




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:

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

            a.  On 26 August 1999, she was found unfit to perform the
duties of her office, rank, grade or rating by reason of a physical
disability; that the diagnosis in her case was mild Dysthymic
Disorder, VASRD Code 9433, rated at 10 percent; that the disability
existed prior to service without service aggravation; and that the
disability was permanent.

            b.  She was honorably discharged on 27 August 1999, under
the provisions of AFI 36-3212 by reason of a physical disability,
which existed prior to service, without entitlement to disability
severance pay.





            JOE G. LINEBERGER

            Director

            Air Force Review Boards Agency