RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-00533
            INDEX CODE:  110.02
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His separation and reentry code be changed and recoupment  of  the  unserved
portion of his enlistment bonus be waived.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He believes that he entered the military in good faith and served well.   He
was released from the military against his wishes.  He  was  never  given  a
second opinion even though  numerous  requests  were  made.   His  discharge
package was accepted in spite of the facts it contained  false  information.
He has aspirations of obtaining a job but fears that his  separation  papers
will hinder any opportunity he may seek.  He wishes to  change  this  so  he
can go on with his life.  He was granted 30 days  of  permissive  TDY  which
means he should have received two final paychecks.  He did not  receive  his
last check or the 40 days of leave he sold.  He was told  by  DFAS  that  he
had to pay back his bonus; however, he was  previously  told  he  would  not
have to pay.  He is now broke with bills to pay and  no  way  to  pay  them.
This debt along with other debts, and a  court  battle  with  his  estranged
wife, has caused severe damage to his life.  He is stuck in limbo and is  at
risk of bankruptcy.

In support of his request, applicant submits a personal statement,  copy  of
his DD Form 214 and copies of  his  correspondence  with  his  Congressional
representative.   The  applicant’s  submission,  with  attachments,  is   at
Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 12 January 2000, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air  Force  for  a
period of 6 years as a guaranteed training  enlistee  for  training  in  Air
Force Specialty (AFS) 2W131 (Aircraft Armament Systems).   In  a  supplement
to the enlistment agreement signed by the  applicant  on  the  date  of  his
enlistment, the applicant acknowledged that, upon  completion  of  technical
training and award of the 3-skill level in his guaranteed AFSC, he would  be
authorized  payment  of  an  initial  enlistment  bonus  in  the  amount  of
$7,000.00 and that, should he voluntarily or involuntarily not complete  the
term of obligated service for which the bonus was paid,  or  should  he  not
maintain qualification in the bonus AFSC, he would be required to repay  the
unearned portion of the  bonus.   Following  his  successful  completion  of
basic military and technical training, he was assigned  to  duties  in  AFSC
2W121E in July 2000.  He received two Enlisted Performance  Reports  closing
14 August 2002 and 9 September 2001, in which his overall  evaluations  were
5 and 3 respectively (5 being the highest rating).

On 21 December 2000, applicant received a letter of  reprimand  for  failure
to obey a lawful order given by the first sergeant.

On 29 January 2002, applicant received a letter of  counseling  for  failure
to report to his appointed place of duty at the appointed time.

On 8 October 2002, in accordance with AFPD 36-32 and  AFI  36-3208,  Chapter
5, Section B, Involuntary Convenience of  the  Government,  paragraph  5.11,
Conditions that Interfere with  Military  Service,  specifically,  paragraph
5.11.1 Mental  Disorders,  the  commander  initiated  discharge  proceedings
against the applicant.  The applicant was advised  of  his  rights  in  this
matter.  After consulting counsel, the  applicant  submitted  statements  on
his own behalf, accompanied by a supporting statement from his area  defense
counsel.

In a memorandum dated 17 October 2002, the staff  psychiatrist,  Kadena  AB,
Japan, indicated that the applicant had been evaluated by a minimum of  four
doctoral level mental health professionals, to include three  psychiatrists.
 It was stated he first received a diagnosis of a personality  disorder  two
years before and this diagnosis remained consistent  in  multiple  settings.
The applicant repeatedly  failed  to  participate  in  recommended  therapy.
This physician  stated  a  fifth  psychiatric  opinion  at  the  applicant’s
request was not, in her opinion, a reasonable use  of  resources  nor  would
the evaluation provide reliable data.

In a legal review of the discharge case  file,  the  assistant  staff  judge
advocate found it legally sufficient and recommended that the  applicant  be
discharged from the Air Force with an honorable discharge without  probation
and rehabilitation.  On 8 November 2002, the  discharge  authority  directed
that the applicant be honorably discharged from  the  Air  Force  under  the
provisions of AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-3208, Chapter 5, Section B,  Involuntary
Convenience of the Government, Paragraph 5.11.9, Conditions  that  Interfere
with   Military   Service,   Mental   Disorders,   without   probation   and
rehabilitation.  The applicant was discharged on 15 January 2003  by  reason
of  “Personality  Disorder”  with  a  Separation  Code  of   “JFX”   and   a
Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of “2C.”  He had served three  years  and
four days on active duty.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to  the  applicant’s  mental  health
evaluations, extracted from the applicant’s medical records,  are  contained
in the letter prepared by the BCMR Medical Consultant at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends the application be denied.  The  BCMR
Medical Consultant states the applicant’s mental  health  records  show  the
diagnosis of Personality Disorder  is  well  documented  and  there  was  no
substantive disagreement between the mental health providers caring for  him
over two years.   All  providers  noted  the  strong  presence  of  abnormal
narcissistic  personality  features.   Personality  disorders  are  lifelong
patterns of maladjustment in the individual’s  personality  structure  which
are not medically disqualifying or unfitting but may render  the  individual
unsuitable for further military service and may be cause for  administrative
action by the individual’s unit  commander.   The  BCMR  Medical  Consultant
further states although the applicant demonstrated the  ability  to  perform
his duties  in  an  exemplary  fashion,  he  exhibited  a  pattern  of  poor
interpersonal skills with difficulties in interpersonal  relationships  with
peers and supervisors; and inability to  conduct  himself  appropriately  in
all  military  settings,  poor  coping  skills  under  stress   leading   to
psychological distress and impulsive  self  injurious  behavior.   Applicant
demonstrated an ongoing need  for  mental  health  services  yet  repeatedly
declined and was non-compliant with the therapeutic modality in helping  him
overcome his difficulties with interpersonal  skills  and  coping  with  the
stresses of military life and his marriage.

The BCMR Medical Consultant advises recoupment of  enlistment,  reenlistment
and retention bonuses is merited under current policy  and  regulation  when
administrative discharge is for a condition considered unsuiting,  including
personality disorder, adjustment disorder, impulse control disorders,  or  a
phobia such as fear of  flying.   The  BCMR  Medical  Consultant  opines  no
change  in  the  records  is  warranted.   The  BCMR  Medical   Consultant’s
evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 30 July 2004, a copy  of  the  Air  Force  evaluation  was  sent  to  the
applicant for review and comment.  As of this  date,  this  office  has  not
received a 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.  The applicant is seeking a change  to  his
separation code to be relieved of the  requirement  that  he  reimburse  the
government for the unearned portion  of  the  Initial  Enlistment  Bonus  he
received.  The record reveals  that  at  the  time  of  his  enlistment,  he
acknowledged that should he voluntarily or involuntarily  not  complete  the
term of obligated service for which the bonus was paid,  or  should  he  not
maintain qualification in the bonus Air  Force  Specialty  Code  (AFSC),  he
would be  required  to  repay  the  unearned  portion  of  the  bonus.   The
separation code he received corresponds  directly  to  the  reason  for  his
separation.  Although the applicant demonstrated the ability to perform  his
duties in an exemplary manner, the record shows that he exhibited a  pattern
of poor  interpersonal  skills  with  an  ongoing  need  for  mental  health
services.  Other than his own assertions,  the  applicant  has  provided  no
evidence indicating the information in his discharge case file  and  medical
records is erroneous, the diagnosis of a personality disorder  in  his  case
was not based on accepted medical principles, his  substantial  rights  were
violated, or his commanders abused their discretionary  authority.   In  the
absence of such evidence, we have no basis to find his discharge or  his  RE
code, which directly corresponds  to  the  involuntary  nature  and  service
characterization of his separation, are erroneous or injust.  Likewise,  the
applicant  has  provided  no  evidence  indicating  the  recoupment  of  the
unserved portion of his  enlistment  bonus  was  improper  or  he  has  been
treated differently from other similarly situated members.  Accordingly,  in
view of the above, the applicant’s requests are not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented  did  not  demonstrate
the existence of probable 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 15 September 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

            Mr. Laurence M. Groner, Panel Chair
            Ms. Jean A. Reynolds, Member
            Ms. Carolyn B. Willis, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with  AFBCMR
Docket Number BC-2004-00533:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dtd 23 Jan 04, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dtd 27 Jul 04.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Jul 04.





                                   LAURENCE M. GRONER
                                   Panel Chair