RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  01-03652
            INDEX CODE:  110.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His narrative reason for separation, separation code and  reenlistment
eligibility (RE) code be changed to allow eligibility to  reenlist  in
the military.

His mailing address after separation and the nearest  relative  listed
on his DD Form 214, Blocks 19.a and 19.b, be changed.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The medical  doctor  submitted  the  wrong  diagnosis  for  separation
“Personality Disorder” - it should be changed to “Failure to Adapt.”

In support of his request, the applicant submits a personal statement,
copies of his DD Form 214, medical statements, statements of  support,
medical  documentation,  DD  Form  293  (Application  for  Review   of
Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States) and
additional  documents  associated  with  the  issues  cited   in   his
contentions.  The applicant’s complete submission,  with  attachments,
is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant contracted his enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 11 Oct
00 for a period of four years.

On 12 Jan 01, the applicant was  evaluated  by  the  Inpatient  Mental
Health Service  at  Keesler  Medical  Center  and  diagnosed  with  an
adjustment disorder, with mixed disturbance of emotions  and  conduct.
He was recommended for separation.

On 27 Jan 01, applicant was notified  of  his  commander's  intent  to
impose nonjudicial punishment on him  under  Article  15,  UCMJ.   The
misconduct applicant had allegedly  committed  was  for  being  absent
without leave (AWOL) during the period 4-9 Jan 01 and failure  to  go,
during the period 22 and 23 Jan 01, in violation of Article 86,  UCMJ.
The applicant consulted a lawyer, waived his right to demand trial  by
court-martial and accepted nonjudicial punishment.  After  considering
all matters presented to him, the commander found that  the  applicant
did commit one or more of the offenses alleged.  The commander imposed
punishment consisting of a forfeiture of $482.00 and  restriction  for
30 days.  Applicant did not appeal the punishment.

On 18 Jan 01, the applicant received notification that  he  was  being
recommended for  discharge  for  mental  disorders.   He  received  an
uncharacterized  entry  level  separation  on  1  Feb  01  under   the
provisions of AFI 36-3208 (personality disorder).  He had completed  a
total of 3 months and 20 days and was serving in the grade  of  airman
basic (E-1) at the time of separation.  He received an RE Code of  2C,
which  defined  means  "Involuntarily  separated  with  an   honorable
discharge; or, entry  level  separation  without  characterization  of
service."
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends the  application  be  denied.
The AFBCMR Medical Consultant states that, upon the applicant’s return
from being absent without leave (AWOL), he was hospitalized  9-17  Jan
01  with  depressed  mood  and  suicidal  ideation.   The   psychiatry
narrative summary reveals  a  history  of  three  incidents  of  self-
injurious behavior since  entering  the  military  and  a  history  of
multiple suicide  gestures  and  expressions  prior  to  entering  the
military.  The applicant was apparently hospitalized for  three  weeks
at a psychiatric hospital in the summer before entering the  military.
On his enlistment screening questionnaires, the applicant answered  in
the negative to questions regarding a history  of  mental  illness  or
treatment by mental health professionals or hospitalization for mental
health issues.

The AFBCMR Medical Consultant states that the applicant demonstrated a
pattern of maladjustment in his personality structure that was evident
prior to service manifesting as depressed mood and repetitive suicidal
attempts or  gestures.   Shortly  after  entering  active  duty,  this
pattern recurred and he was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder with
mixed disturbance of  emotions  and  conduct.   He  also  demonstrated
abnormal personality traits suggestive of  an  underlying  personality
disorder; however, formal diagnosis was deferred  likely  because  all
diagnostic criteria were not met.  His condition, though not medically
disqualifying or unfitting, rendered  the  individual  unsuitable  for
further military service and resulted in administrative action by  the
unit commander.  Action and disposition in this case  are  proper  and
equitable  reflecting  compliance  with  Air  Force  directives   that
implement the law.  The AFBCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation  is  at
Exhibit C.


HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends the applicant’s request for a change  to  his
narrative reason for separation be denied.  DPPRS states  that,  based
upon the documentation in the file, the discharge was consistent  with
the  procedural  and  substantive  requirements   of   the   discharge
regulation.  The applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify
any errors or injustices that occurred in  the  discharge  processing.
The HQ AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D.


HQ AFPC/DPPAE recommends the applicant’s request for a change  to  his
reenlistment eligibility (RE)  code  be  denied.   DPPAE  states  that
applicant’s RE code of 2C is correct.  The HQ AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is
at Exhibit E.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to applicant on  23
August 2002 for review and response.  As of this date, no response has
been received by this office (Exhibit F).
_________________________________________________________________

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Pursuant to the Board’s request for clarification regarding whether  a
change of the narrative  reason  for  discharge  currently  listed  as
personality disorder  is  justified,  the  AFBCMR  Medical  Consultant
provided the following advisory opinion.

The AFBCMR Medical Consultant is of the opinion that no change in  the
records is warranted.  The AFBCMR Medical Consultant states  that  the
applicant was administratively discharged  for  unsuitability  due  to
adjustment  disorder  and  unsuiting  maladaptive  personality  traits
listed on Axis II of his mental health  diagnosis  as  borderline  and
antisocial  traits.   During  his  short  time  on  active  duty,  the
applicant committed misconduct, including going AWOL  and  failure  to
go.  Additionally, he concealed his history of mental illness  on  his
entrance medical examinations, thus, fraudulently gaining  entry  into
the Air Force.  The applicant demonstrated a pattern of  maladjustment
in his  personality  structure  that  was  evident  prior  to  service
manifesting as depressed mood  and  repetitive  suicidal  attempts  or
gestures.  The applicant’s narrative reason for discharge is listed as
personality disorder even though his primary diagnosis was  adjustment
disorder.    The   DoD   uses   the   term   “personality    disorder”
administratively on  the  DD  Form  214  to  refer  to  all  unsuiting
character  and  behavior  disorder,  including  adjustment   disorder,
personality disorders and impulse control disorders.

The AFBCMR Medical Consultant states that the applicant clearly had an
established pattern of  maladaptive  coping  and  abnormal  behavioral
responses  prior  to  entering  the  service  more   consistent   with
maladaptive personality traits, if not a  personality  disorder.   The
post-service psychological testing does not change the  facts  of  the
record nor his diagnoses while on active duty.   In  cases  where  the
diagnosis of adjustment disorder  is  clear  and  uncomplicated  by  a
personality  disorder  diagnosis  or  the  presence   of   maladaptive
personality traits, as recorded  on  Axis  II  of  the  mental  health
diagnosis, and there is no misconduct, the AFBCMR  Medical  Consultant
will recommend consideration of  changing  the  narrative  reason  for
discharge to Secretarial Authority.  This case was complicated both by
the presence of diagnosed Axis II personality traits  and  misconduct.
The opinion of the Medical Consultant is that the narrative reason for
discharge as personality disorder is proper.  Even if  his  adjustment
disorder diagnosis was uncomplicated by abnormal personality traits or
misconduct, he is not suited for reentry into military service and the
reenlistment eligibility code  should  not  be  changed.   The  AFBCMR
Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit G.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to  applicant  on  23
January 2003 for review and response.  As of this  date,  no  response
has been received by this office (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 error or injustice.  After thoroughly  reviewing  the
evidence of record and  noting  the  applicant’s  submission,  we  are
unpersuaded that the requested relief should be approved.  Applicant’s
contentions are duly noted; however, we found no  persuasive  evidence
that  responsible  officials  applied   inappropriate   standards   in
effecting  the  applicant’s  discharge,  that  pertinent   Air   Force
instructions were violated or that the applicant was not afforded  all
the rights to which entitled at the time of discharge.   We  therefore
agree with the opinions and recommendations  of  the  appropriate  Air
Force offices and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis  for  our
decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden  that  he
has suffered either an error or an injustice.  With regard to  the  DD
Form 214 correction, no evidence has been presented to  indicate  that
the information reflected in Blocks 19a and 19b were incorrect at  the
time of his separation.  In view of the above  and  absent  persuasive
evidence to the contrary, we find no  compelling  basis  to  recommend
granting the relief sought in this application.
_________________________________________________________________

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  this  application  in
Executive Session on 13 Mar 03, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                  Mr. David W. Mulgrew, Panel Chair
                  Mr. Billy C. Baxter, Member
                  Mr. Clarence D. Long III, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered in  connection  with
AFBCMR Docket Number 01-03652.

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 Apr 02, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 17 May 02.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 6 Jun 02.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAE, dated 15 Aug 02.
   Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Aug 02.
   Exhibit G.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 14 Jan 03.
   Exhibit H.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 23 Jan 03.




                                   DAVID W. MULGREW
                                   Panel Chair