RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  01-02424
            INDEX CODE:  108.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her general discharge be changed to a medical discharge.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The evaluations by her noncommissioned officer in charge (NCOIC)  were
unjust.  No further investigation was done.

In  support  of  her  appeal,  the   applicant   provided   supportive
statements, including statements from her mother and  a  psychiatrist,
and extracts from her medical records.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 24 May 00.

On 20 Apr 01, the applicant’s commander notified  the  applicant  that
she was recommending her  discharge  from  the  Air  Force  for  minor
disciplinary infractions.  The reason for the proposed action  was  as
follows:

      a.  On or about 22 Dec 00, she attempted to  obtain  more  leave
than what her supervisor and her agreed on by going around  her  chain
of command.  For this offense  she  received  a  Letter  of  Reprimand
(LOR).

      b.  On or about 5  Jan  01,  she  failed  to  participate  in  a
mandatory Military Personnel Flight (MPF) Fitness Formation.  For this
offense she received an LOR.

      c.  On or about 11 Jan 01, she  was  late  for  an  MPF  Fitness
Formation.  For this offense she received an LOR.

      d.  On or about 14  Feb  01,  she  failed  to  go  at  the  time
prescribed to her appointed place of  duty,  bay  orderly.   For  this
offense she received an LOR.

      e.  On or about 17 Feb 01, she was derelict in  the  performance
of her Bay Orderly details.  On or about 19 Feb 01, she failed  to  go
at the time prescribed to  her  appointed  place  of  duty,  dormitory
manager’s office.  On or about 20 Feb 01, she failed to go at the time
prescribed to her appointed place of duty, dormitory manager’s office.
 For these offenses she received nonjudicial punishment under  Article
15.

      f.  On or about 11 Mar 01, she unlawfully struck  an  airman  on
the face with her open hand.  For this offense she received an Article
15.

      g.  On or about 30 Mar  01,  she  was  insubordinate  towards  a
noncommissioned officer (NCO) by raising her voice at her.   For  this
offense, she received an LOR.

       h.  On  or  about  2  Apr  01,  she   was   informed   by   her
noncommissioned officer in charge (NCOIC) that she was prohibited from
using telephones at work.  Later on that day, she  was  noticed  using
her cell phone on the smoking  patio  during  duty  hours.   For  this
offense she received an LOR.

The applicant was advised of her rights  in  the  matter  and  that  a
general discharge would be recommended.

A Commander-Directed Mental Health Evaluation Letter, dated  8 Mar 01,
indicated that the applicant was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder
with mixed disturbance of emotions and  conduct  as  manifested  by  a
series  of  ineffective  work   performance/habits   and   conflictual
relationships with work peers and her chain of command.  She was  also
diagnosed with a personality disorder not otherwise  specified  (mixed
type) with paranoid and narcissistic features,  mild.   The  evaluator
stated that the applicant did not have  a  psychiatric  disorder  that
warranted disposition  by  a  medical  evaluation  board.   Therefore,
disciplinary and administrative measures could be  applied  as  deemed
appropriate.  He also stated that the applicant’s personality disorder
did not significantly impair her ability to adapt to military service.

In a legal review of the discharge case file, dated  20  Apr  01,  the
Staff Judge  Advocate  found  the  file  was  legally  sufficient  and
recommended that the applicant be discharged with a general discharge.


On 25 Apr 01, the discharge authority approved  the  discharge  action
and directed that the applicant be furnished a general discharge.

On 4 May 01, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of  AFI
36-3208 (Misconduct) and  furnished  a  general  discharge.   She  had
served 11 months and 10 days on active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Chief Medical Consultant, AFBCMR, recommended denial.  The Medical
Consultant noted that the applicant was considerably older  than  most
first-term enlistees, being at  an  age  (mid-to  late-20s)  where  an
underlying latent psychosis frequently becomes  overt.   According  to
the Medical Consultant, this in no way implies that the  short  period
of time spent in the military was the  cause  of  her  later-diagnosed
psychosis.   However,  the  Department  of  Veterans   Affairs   (DVA)
frequently will judge problems that develop within a year  of  service
termination to be service-connected for disability consideration,  and
it is likely that this will happen in this  case.   He  did  not  have
records from the DVA regarding such a determination, and the applicant
was encouraged to see what, if any, benefits she might be entitled  to
from this source.  Clearly, the applicant did  not  exhibit  signs  or
symptoms of a  full-blown  psychotic  disorder  while  undergoing  her
mental  health  evaluation,  and  a  disability  separation  was   not
warranted then, nor recommended  now.   In  the  Medical  Consultant’s
opinion, no change in the records was warranted.

A complete copy of the Medical Consultant’s evaluation is  at  Exhibit
C.

AFPC/DPPD recommended denial.   According  to  AFPC/DPPD,  a  thorough
review of the AFBCMR case file revealed no  errors  or  irregularities
during the applicant’s involuntary administrative discharge that would
justify a change to her military records.  The medical aspects of this
case were fully explained by the Medical Consultant.   They  concurred
with the  advisory.   In  AFPC/DPPD’s  view,  the  applicant  has  not
submitted any material or documentation to show she was unfit due to a
physical disability under the provisions  of  Chapter  61,  Title  10,
United  States  Code  (USC),  at   the   time   of   her   involuntary
administrative discharge.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to applicant on  15
Nov 01 for review and response.  As of this date, no
response has been received by this office (Exhibit E).

_________________________________________________________________

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.   The  evidence  of  record
indicates  that  the  applicant  was  diagnosed  with  adjustment  and
personality disorders.  However, the evaluator at the time  determined
that the applicant did not have a psychiatric disorder that  warranted
disposition by a medical evaluation board, and  that  her  personality
disorder did not significantly impair her ability to adapt to military
service.  She was eventually given a general discharge, on 4  May  01,
for misconduct.  However, almost immediately after her discharge,  the
applicant was diagnosed  by  a  civilian  mental  health  clinic  with
schizophrenia, paranoid type, and she is currently under the care of a
psychiatrist.  She now requests that her discharge  be  changed  to  a
medical discharge.  While we find no evidence that the  discharge  was
contrary to the prevailing  regulation,  we  are  extremely  concerned
about the  close  proximity  of  the  applicant’s  discharge  and  her
diagnosis with schizophrenia.  Notwithstanding  the  determination  by
the military mental  health  evaluator  that  her  condition  did  not
warrant disability processing, we believe referring this case  to  the
office of primary responsibility (OPR)  for  a  review  by  a  medical
evaluation  board  and  a  physical  evaluation,  if   necessary,   is
appropriate.  In our view, this would afford the applicant proper  and
fitting relief.  Accordingly, we recommend that action be taken as set
forth below.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

Invitational  travel  orders  be  issued  by  competent  authority  to
APPLICANT for the purpose of undergoing  a  physical  examination  and
review by the Medical Evaluation Board (MEB), the Physical  Evaluation
Board (PEB) and  the  Formal  Physical  Evaluation  Board  (FPEB),  if
necessary, to determine her medical condition as  of  4 May  01;  and,
that the results of the evaluation 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  application  in
Executive Session on 9 Jan 02, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Gregory H. Petkoff, Panel Chair
      Mr. Thomas J. Topolski, Member
      Mr. Clarence D. Long III, Member

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

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 16 Aug 01, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, Medical Consultant, dated 12 Oct 01.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 7 Nov 01.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Nov 01.




                                   GREGORY H. PETKOFF
                                   Panel Chair










AFBCMR 01-02424




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:

      Invitational travel orders be issued by competent authority to ,
for the purpose of undergoing a physical examination and review by the
Medical Evaluation Board (MEB), the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB)
and the Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB), if necessary, to
determine her medical condition as of 4 May 01; and, that the results
of the evaluation 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.






    JOE G. LINEBERGER

    Director

    Air Force Review Boards Agency