RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-02969
            INDEX CODE:  110.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His narrative reason for separation (personality disorder) be changed.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The disorder he received is not permanent and he is totally  recovered.   He
desires to join the Montana Air National Guard.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force  on  6  September  2000  in  the
grade of airman basic for a period of six years.

On 21 November 2001, the applicant received a  letter  of  reprimand  (LOR),
for his failure to make a scheduled PHA appointment.

On 21 December 2001, the commander withheld the applicant’s  promotion.   He
indicated  the   applicant   declined   to   accept   the   responsibilities
commensurate with the rank of airman first class.

On 10 January 2002, the applicant received a letter of reprimand (LOR),  for
wearing a tongue stud.

A mental health summary, dated 9 January 2002, indicates the following:

      On 30 November 2001 the applicant expressed dissatisfaction  with  his
job and his desire to separate from  the  Air  Force,  wondering  if  mental
health could help him separate.  He said he would like to separate from  the
Air Force in any way that does not involve getting into trouble.

      On 3 December 2001, the applicant was seen in  the  alcohol  and  drug
abuse prevention and treatment program.  He did not  mention  any  traumatic
event or anxiety symptoms.

      On 17 December 2001, the applicant was seen by  the  psychiatrist  and
stated  he  had  experienced  a  traumatic  event  in  October  and  anxiety
symptoms.  The psychiatrist felt his story lacked credibility.

      He was diagnosed with AXIS I: v71.09 No Diagnosis on Axis I; AXIS  II:
v71.09 No Diagnosis on Axis II; AXIS III: Unremarkable.

On  24  January  2002,  the  applicant’s  civilian  provider  diagnosed  the
applicant  with  post-traumatic  stress  disorder   and   major   depressive
disorder.  He did not believe the applicant would ever be able  to  function
effectively  within  his  squadron  because  of  the  distrust  between  the
squadron and the applicant.

On 4 February 2002, the clinical psychologist recommended the applicant  for
permanent decertification from  the  Personnel  Reliability  Program  (PRP).
The evaluation indicated the applicant was self-referred to the Life  Skills
Support Center on 30 November 2001 and had been seen a total of eight  times
for treatment of self-reported occupation dissatisfaction, alcohol use,  and
anxiety.  In addition he independently  sought  treatment  from  a  civilian
provider who diagnosed him with post-traumatic stress disorder and  a  major
depressive disorder.

The clinical  psychologist  indicated  the  applicant  had  not  provided  a
complete account of  events  transpiring  in  October  2001.   Psychological
testing  indicated  the  applicant  experienced  significant   psychological
distress related to anxiety and fear about real  or  imagined  threats.   He
may have viewed the world as unsafe and was fearful much of  the  time.   An
exaggerated self-worth, a strong identification with  traditional  masculine
interests, and a belief that “men  are  strong  individuals”  likely  caused
significant distress and eroded  self-confidence  as  he  was  perceived  as
having a  lack  of  self-control  and  had  concerns  for  personal  safety.
Persecutory beliefs were a common theme and he likely distrusted others  and
believed he was being unfairly blamed or  punished.   The  applicant  had  a
strong  need  for  affection  and  safety  that  he  identified  with  home.
Individuals with a similar response style  often  experience  problems  with
alcohol and drugs.

The recommendation further indicated the applicant possessed the skills  and
abilities necessary to function effectively in the  military,  his  lack  of
motivation to remain in the Air Force and his perceived lack of  support  by
the military community decreased the probability of effective treatment  and
increased the severity of symptoms impairing his ability  to  function.   He
was  judged  unsuitable  for  military  service.   He  was  recommended  for
permanent decertification from  PRP  due  to  the  diagnosis  of  adjustment
disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood.  He is not  recommended  for
“A” or “B” weapons bearing on the basis of the mental health diagnosis.

On 13 February 2002, the applicant was permanently decertified from the  Air
Force  Nuclear  Weapons  PRP  in  accordance  with  AFI  36-2104  for  being
diagnosed with adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood.

On 4 April 2002, the applicant was notified of  his  commander's  intent  to
initiate discharge action  against  him  for  a  mental  disorder.   He  was
diagnosed with AXIS I: 309.28 Adjustment Disorder  with  Mixed  Anxiety  and
Depressed Mood, Acute.  The clinical psychologist indicated the  applicant’s
condition was severe enough to render him unsuitable for  military  service.
His behavior warranted a recommendation  for  administrative  separation  in
accordance with DOD Directive 6490.1 paragraph 4.3.6.2

The commander indicated in his  recommendation  for  discharge  action  that
probation and rehabilitation were not appropriate based upon  the  diagnosis
by the clinical psychologist.

The commander advised the applicant of his right to  consult  legal  counsel
and to submit statements in his own behalf; or waive the above rights  after
consulting with counsel.

After  consulting  counsel,  the  applicant  waived  his  right  to   submit
statements in his own behalf.

On  15  April  2002,  the  Deputy  Staff  Judge  Advocate,  recommended  the
applicant be discharged for a mental disorder with  an  honorable  discharge
without probation and rehabilitation.

The discharge authority approved the applicant’s honorable discharge.

Applicant was honorably discharged  on  19  April  2002,  in  the  grade  of
airman, under the provisions of  AFI  36-3208  (Personality  Disorder).   He
served a total of 1 year, 7 months and  14 days  of  total  active  military
service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial.  He indicated  the  applicant
was diagnosed with maladaptive personality traits on Axis II of  the  formal
psychiatric diagnosis  and  the  reviewer  concluded  that  the  applicant’s
difficulties were mostly due to his maladaptive personality traits  and  his
DD Form 214 accurately reflects the reason for discharge.  The fact that  he
is functioning  well  at  this  time  at  home  confirms  his  diagnosis  of
Adjustment Disorder, however, it does not predict that he will respond  well
to the stresses of military operations, assignment to  duties  he  does  not
like,  deployment,  or  combat  when  is   separated   from   his   familiar
surroundings  and  usual  support  system  of  family  and   friends.    His
underlying personality structure and his past experience  is  predictive  of
an unacceptably increased risk for recurrence of  symptoms  when  re-exposed
to the requirements and rigors of military service.  Action and  disposition
in this case are proper and equitable reflecting compliance with  Air  Force
directives that implement the law.

The evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPRSP   recommended   denial.    They   indicated   based   upon   the
documentation in the file, they believe the discharge  was  consistent  with
the procedural and substantive requirements  of  the  discharge  regulation.
Additionally, the discharge was  within  the  discretion  of  the  discharge
authority.  The applicant did not submit any new evidence  or  identify  any
errors  or  injustices  that   occurred   in   the   discharge   processing.
Additionally, he provided no facts warranting a  change  in  his  discharge.
Accordingly, they concur with  the  BCMR  Medical  Consultant  advisory  and
recommend his records remain the same.  He has filed a timely request.

The evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 19 December 2003, copies of the Air Force evaluations were  forwarded  to
the applicant for review and response within 30 days.  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.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to  demonstrate  the
existence of an error or injustice  that  would  warrant  a  change  to  his
narrative reason for separation (personality disorder).   After  a  thorough
review of the evidence of  record  we  are  not  persuaded  that  given  the
circumstances surrounding his separation from the Air Force,  the  narrative
reason for  separation  should  be  changed.   The  applicant  contends  the
disorder he received is not  permanent  and  he  is  totally  recovered  and
desires to join the Montana Air  National  Guard.   The  applicant  has  not
provided any evidence which would lead us to  believe  otherwise.   We  note
the  opinion  from  the  BCMR  Medical  Consultant   which   indicates   the
applicant’s initial contact with mental health professionals was due to  job
dissatisfaction and a desire to separate from  the  Air  Force.   After  his
initial request for separation was not successful, he disclosed a  traumatic
event that occurred in October 2001 while on  leave  and  believed`  he  was
feeling  symptoms  of  Post-Traumatic  Stress  Disorder.   After  additional
mental health evaluations the applicant was  diagnosed  with  an  adjustment
disorder  and  his  difficulties  were  mostly  due   to   his   maladaptive
personality traits.  The Medical Consultant further indicates the fact  that
the applicant is  functioning  well  at  this  time  at  home  confirms  his
diagnosis of adjustment disorder, however, it does not predict that he  will
respond well to the stresses of military operations,  assignment  to  duties
he does not like, deployment, or  combat  when  he  is  separated  from  his
familiar surroundings and usual support system of family and  friends.   His
underlying personality structure and his past experience  is  predictive  of
an unacceptably increased risk for recurrence of  symptoms  when  re-exposed
to the requirements and rigors of military service.  In view of  the  above,
the applicant has not shown to the satisfaction of the Board that  it  would
be to the applicant’s or  the  Air  Force’s  benefit  to  return  him  to  a
situation that has caused so much distress in the past.  Therefore,  in  the
absence of persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling  basis
to recommend granting the relief sought.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented  did  not  demonstrate
the existence of an 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-2003-
02969 in Executive Session on 11 February 2004, under the provisions of  AFI
36-2603:

                  Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
                  Ms. Ann-Cecile McDermott, Member
                  Ms. Leslie E. Abbott, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 23 March 2003, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant,
               dated 7 November 2003.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRSP, dated 26 November 2003.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 December 2003.




                                THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                Chair