RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:            DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2002-03291
                 INDEX CODE:  110.00
                 COUNSEL:  NONE

                 HEARING DESIRED:  NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be set aside and she  be
given a disability retirement.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The discharge she received was improper because she  was  diagnosed  with  a
bipolar disorder one month after receiving her discharge.  She was going  to
life skills daily before her discharge telling them the  same  exact  things
she is telling her present doctor and was never properly diagnosed.  If  she
would have been properly diagnosed, she believes she could have  gotten  the
help and medication she needed to make a complete  turnaround  and  wouldn't
have been discharged  for  unsatisfactory  performance.   She  is  currently
being seen for her disorder and  is  considered  30%  disabled  through  the
Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA).

In support of her request, the applicant submits a copy  of  a  DVA  medical
report and rating decision

The applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant contracted her initial enlistment in the Regular Air Force  on
6 January 1999.  She was progressively  promoted  to  the  grade  of  airman
first class, having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank  of
6 Apr 99.

On 22  Oct  01,  applicant  was  notified  by  her  commander  that  he  was
recommending that she be discharged from the Air Force  in  accordance  with
AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-3208, paragraphs  5.26.1  and  5.26.3.   The  specific
reason for this action was that she received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR)  on
12 Dec 00 for writing seven bad checks without sufficient funds, and an  LOR
on 4 Jan 01 for repeated failure of emergency actions controller exams.   On
16 Feb 01, a Security Information File (SIF) was established suspending  her
access to classified information.  She received another LOR  on  12  Mar  01
for writing several bad checks and failure to pay just debts.  She  received
non-judicial punishment on 14 May 02 with an Article 15 for making  a  false
official statement with intent to deceive (regarding  the  number  of  leave
days she had on her leave and earning statement, and that  she  had  already
purchased an airline ticket home, both facts were  false),  and  substandard
performance (referral EPR,  SIF,  losing  cryptographic  access).   She  was
advised of her rights  in  this  matter  and  acknowledged  receipt  of  the
notification on 22 Oct 01.  Applicant waived her right  to  consult  counsel
and elected not submit matters on her own behalf. In a legal review  of  the
case, the staff judge  advocate,  found  the  case  legally  sufficient  but
disagreed with the commander's recommendation that  an  honorable  discharge
was warranted and recommended that she be discharge with  a  general  (under
honorable conditions) discharge.  On 30  Oct  01,  the  discharge  authority
concurred with the recommendation and directed that she be  discharged  with
a general discharge, without probation and  rehabilitation.   Applicant  was
discharged from the Air Force on 2 Nov 01.  She served 2  years,  9  months,
and 27 days on active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical  Consultant  recommends  denial.   The  Medical  Consultant
states that in the  months  prior  to  the  applicant's  discharge  she  was
diagnosed first with adjustment disorder and then  depression  that  rapidly
responded to therapy but was not deemed severe enough to warrant  evaluation
in  the  disability  evaluation  system  (DES).   Following  her  discharge,
recurrent depression and a family history of bipolar disorder has led  to  a
reported diagnosis of bipolar disorder and disability  compensation  by  the
DVA.

The  applicant  clearly  has  an  affective  disorder  diagnosed  as   major
depression while on active duty.  The May 2001  psychiatry  evaluation  also
diagnosed depression but opined that she might have bipolar  disorder  based
on a reported family history of bipolar disorder and not  based  on  clearly
identified hypomanic or manic episodes.  Thus, the  post  service  diagnosis
of bipolar disorder is not fully supported by the evidence  presented.   Her
symptoms of depression were not of the  severity  to  warrant  referral  for
evaluation in the DES prior  to  her  discharge.   Following  discharge  her
symptoms worsened and she  has  properly  received  disability  compensation
from the DVA.  Increased severity of symptoms  due  to  transient  stressors
associated with separation or retirement from the Air Force  and  relocation
or re-employment will  not  be  considered  in  determining  the  degree  of
impairment for purposes of disability compensation.

The BCMR Medical Consultant is of the opinion that no change in the  records
is warranted.  The preponderance  of  the  evidence  does  not  support  the
applicant's contention that her  misconduct  was  the  result  of  mania  of
undiagnosed Bipolar Disorder and excuses her from the consequences  of  that
behavior and makes her eligible for  a  disability  discharge.   Action  and
disposition in this case are  proper  and  equitable  reflecting  compliance
with Air Force directives that implement the law.

The BCMR Medical Consultant's evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPD recommends denial.  DPPD states the applicant's justification  for
a change in her current discharge to a disability discharge  appears  to  be
based upon her DVA evaluation conducted in May 02.  The DVA rating  decision
diagnoses the member with a  major  depressive  disorder  and  suggests  the
possibility of a  bipolar  disorder.   Her  service-connection  for  bipolar
disorder with major depressive disorder was  granted  based  on  her  mental
health evaluations conducted during her active military duty.  A  subsequent
DVA psychiatric evaluation in June 2002  rendered  a  diagnosis  of  bipolar
disorder.  Consequently, the DVA  in  October  2002,  granted  her  service-
connected compensation for her bipolar disorder with major depression  rated
as 30 percent disability and retroactive to 3 Nov 01, one day following  her
release from active duty.

DPPD's assessment of the case file  revealed  no  errors  or  irregularities
during the administrative discharge process that would justify a  change  in
her military records.  The preponderance  of  evidence  in  the  applicant's
military  records  does  not  substantiate  or  support  her   request   for
disability discharge.

The AFPC/DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit D.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force Evaluations were forwarded to  the  applicant  on  3
Jul 03 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this  office
has received no response.

___________________________________________________________________

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.   We  took  notice  of  the  applicant's
complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however,  we  do  not
find her  assertions  sufficiently  persuasive  to  override  the  rationale
provided by the Air Force.  We see no  evidence,  which  would  lead  us  to
believe that at the time of her separation,  a  physical  condition  existed
that  would  have  disqualified  her  from   worldwide   military   service.
Therefore,  we  see  no  reason  why  she  would  have  been  eligible   for
consideration in the disability evaluation system.  It is important to  note
that for an individual to be considered unfit for  military  service,  there
must be a medical condition so severe that it prevents  performance  of  any
work commensurate with rank and experience.  In  this  case,  her  condition
did not render her  unfit  for  continued  service.   The  DVA  compensation
system was written to allow awarding  compensation  ratings  for  conditions
that were not unfitting for military  service  but  may  later  progress  in
severity and alter the individual's lifestyle.   Therefore,  we  agree  with
the opinions  and  recommendation  of  the  Air  Force  offices  of  primary
responsibility and adopt their rationale as the  basis  for  our  conclusion
that the applicant has not been the victim of an  error  or  injustice.   In
the absence of persuasive evidence to the contrary,  we  find  no  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 AFBCMR Docket Number  BC-2002-
03291 in Executive Session on 21 Aug 03, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

      Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
      Mr. Roscoe Hinton, Jr., Member
      ms. Brenda L. Romine, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 22 Nov 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 27 May 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 25 Jun 01.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Jul 03.




                                   RICHARD A. PETERSON
                                   Panel Chair