RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: 01-02514

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  YES


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

She be medically retired with a disability rating of 30%.

_________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She  was  given  an  inappropriate  and  damaging  diagnosis  of  borderline
personality disorder without psychiatric testing  at  Wilford  Hall  Medical
Center (WHMC).

The applicant states that the  Informal  Physical  Evaluation  Board  (IPEB)
subtracted 20% for the diagnosis of  borderline  personality  disorder  from
the 30% disability for dysthymia, resulting in a 10% disability  percentage.
 Her condition could not have been diagnosed without psychiatric testing.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 1 June 1994, the applicant was  commissioned  in  the  Reserve  grade  of
captain, Nurses Corps, and entered active duty on 4 July 1994.

A  Medical  Evaluation  Board  (MEB)  convened  on  7 December   2000,   and
recommended the applicant be referred to  an  Informal  Physical  Evaluation
Board (IPEB) based on the diagnosis of  dysthymic  disorder  and  borderline
personality disorder.

On 21 December 2000, an IPEB  convened  and  recommended  the  applicant  be
discharged with severance pay, with a compensable rating of 10%  (i.e.,  30%
current rating less 20%  contributing/aggravating  factors),  based  on  the
diagnosis of dysthymic disorder.  The IPEB found the applicant’s  borderline
personality disorder was  not  unfitting;  however,  were  it  not  for  the
condition, the applicant’s social  and  industrial  adaptability  impairment
rating would be best described as mild. The applicant  did  not  agree  with
the findings of the IPEB and her case was forwarded  to  a  Formal  Physical
Evaluation Board (FPEB).

An FPEB convened on 1  February  2001,  and  recommended  the  applicant  be
discharged with severance pay with a 10% rating based on  the  diagnosis  of
dysthymic disorder, mild social and industrial adaptability impairment.  The
applicant did not concur with the findings of the FPEB, but  did  not  elect
to submit a written rebuttal to the Secretary of  the  Air  Force  Personnel
Council (SAFPC).

On  14  February  2001,  the  SAFPC  determined  the  applicant  should   be
discharged with severance pay, rated at 10%.

On 16 April 2001, the applicant was honorably discharged  from  the  Reserve
under the provisions of AFI  36-3212  (Disability  -  Severance  Pay).   She
completed 7 years, 6  months,  and  20  days  of  active  service,  with  an
additional 13 years and 1 month of reserve duty in various capacities.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends the application be denied.  The  BCMR
Medical Consultant states, in part, that  the  applicant’s  concern  that  a
possible personality  disorder  diagnosis  was  instrumental  in  the  final
determination of her impairment is not borne out by the evidence of  record.
 While there is strong evidence that she is characterized by one or  another
personality disorder(s), the decision that the  FPEB  reached  did  not  use
this in arriving at their recommendation, basing their level of  impairment,
rather, on the improvement in her status over a period of time.   Since  all
factors of her status were considered at the time of  the  final  disability
determination, they cannot  agree  that  she  should  be  considered  for  a
retirement-level impairment of 30%.

The BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPD recommends the application be denied. AFPC/DPPD states,  in  part,
that the applicant was treated fairly  throughout  the  military  disability
evaluation process, that she was properly  rated  under  federal  disability
guidelines, and that she was afforded a full and fair  hearing  as  required
under military disability laws and policy.

The AFPC/DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit D.




DFAS-POCC/DE recommends the application be denied. DFAS-POCC/DE  states,  in
part, that an examination of the applicant’s military pay record shows  that
she received her total payment of disability severance pay.

The DFAS-POCC/DE evaluation is at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

The applicant states that it is slanderous,  negligent,  and  unconscionable
on the part of WHMC that  she  was  diagnosed  with  borderline  personality
disorder  without  the   benefit   of   psychiatric   testing.    Borderline
personality disorder  is  often  given  to  females  by  male  psychiatrists
without  psychiatric  testing.   Furthermore,  no  other   psychiatrist   or
psychologist has given her that diagnosis, even after  psychiatric  testing.
She contends her military career would still be intact if she had  not  seen
favoritism, suffered harassment, and reverse discrimination from  her  nurse
manager and subordinate.

The applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit H.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or
regulations.

2.  The application was timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of probable error or injustice.  After a thorough  review  of  the
evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we  are  not  persuaded  that
relief should be granted.  Applicant’s contentions are duly noted;  however,
we do  not  find  these  assertions,  in  and  by  themselves,  sufficiently
persuasive to override the rationale provided by  the  offices  of  the  Air
Force.  The offices of  primary  responsibility  have  adequately  addressed
applicant’s   contentions   and   we   agree   with   their   opinions   and
recommendations.  We, therefore, adopt the rationale expressed as the  basis
for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain  her  burden  that
she has suffered either an  error  or  an  injustice.   Hence,  we  find  no
compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought.







4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been  shown
that a personal appearance with or without counsel will  materially  add  to
our understanding of the issue(s) involved.  Therefore, the  request  for  a
hearing is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________





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  01-02514  in
Executive Session on 19 March 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                  Mr. Frederick R. Beaman, III, Panel Chair
                  Mr. Clarence D. Long, III, Member
                  Ms. Carolyn B. Willis, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 22 Aug 01, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 1 Oct 01.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 5 Nov 01.
      Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Nov 01.
      Exhibit F.  Letter, DFAS-POCC/DE, dated 5 Feb 02, w/atchs.
      Exhibit G.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Feb 02.
      Exhibit H.  Letter, Applicant, dated 20 Feb 02.




                                   FREDERICK R. BEAMAN, III
                                   Panel Chair