RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00080

      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL: MARSHALL R MUDGE, DVA

      XXXXXXX    HEARING DESIRED:  YES


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 9 JULY 2006


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His narrative reason for separation be  changed  from  “Disability,  Existed
Prior to Service” to a medical discharge.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

There is "no record" of any mental illness in  his  family  history  or  his
until October 2003 and it became progressively severe. Narrative reason  for
separation should be changed to "medical" and the separation code should  be
changed.

In support of his application, applicant submits a  copy  of  DD  Form  293,
Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal From the  Armed  Forces
or the United  States,  personal  letter,  VA  Form  21-4138,  Statement  of
Support of Claim, and a letter from SAF/MRBR.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant entered active  duty  9  March  2002,  at  age  25,  completed
training  and  served  as  a  communication  computer   systems   operations
apprentice. Prior to entering the service the applicant worked as  a  postal
clerk from October 1997 to February 1999, then as a truck driver  for  three
different  employers  until  becoming  unemployed  in  December  2000   (and
apparently remaining so until entering active  duty).  After  completion  of
training, he was assigned to Kadena Air Base, Japan. His performance  report
closing 18 November 2003 was an overall  five  report  reflecting  excellent
duty performance and commenting  the  applicant  was  "One  of  the  hardest
working airmen I have ever worked with "  and  recommended  below  the  zone
promotion.

Review of service medical records  shows  that  during  2003  the  applicant
sought care for a variety  of  physical  complaints  without  clear  medical
cause. A May 2003  (14  months  after  entry)  medical  record  entry  noted
anxiety symptoms. Beginning in late summer 2003 the applicant  presented  on
a frequent basis for various physical  complaints  for  which  no  cause  or
diagnosis could be identified after thorough evaluation. In October 2003  he
was noted to have depressed mood and referred for mental  health  evaluation
leading to subsequent diagnosis and treatment  for  psychotic  disorder  not
otherwise specified  (psychiatrist  suspected  evolving  schizophrenia)  and
referral for Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). The 23  October  2003  internal
medicine evaluation for chest pain recorded a  list  of  symptoms  including
migratory burning discomfort of the chest, arms and legs; headaches,  visual
changes, sleep disturbance, anhedonia, decreased  energy,  and  others.  The
internist stated, "Symptoms  >  one  year  (since  tech  school)."  The  MEB
narrative summary dated  29 January 2004  reported  a  history  of  symptoms
dating to basic training stating he had "not been feeling good  since  basic
training" including feeling distorted and his tongue and eyes would move  by
themselves non-voluntarily.

In January 2004,  a  Medical  Evaluation  Board  was  initiated  leading  to
administrative discharge for  psychotic  disorder  not  otherwise  specified
determined to have  existed  prior  to  service  without  permanent  service
aggravation.

On 18 June 2004, the applicant  was  administratively  separated  under  the
provision of AFI 36-3212, Physical  Evaluation  for  Retention,  Retirement,
and Separation, with an honorable  discharge  and  a  narrative  reason  for
separation of disability, existed prior to service. He served a total  of  2
years and 3 months of total active service.

The applicant filed a claim with the Department of  Veterans  Affairs  (DVA)
for  service  connected  disability  benefits  and  is  presently  receiving
service connected disability compensation for schizophrenia, paranoid  type,
rated 50 percent.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant is of the opinion that no change in the  records
is warranted and states based  on  the  preponderance  of  evidence  of  the
record and accepted  medical  principles,  the  reviewer  concurs  with  the
findings and recommendations of the IPEB. Action  and  disposition  in  this
case  are  proper  and  equitable  reflecting  compliance  with  Air   Force
directives that implement the law.

The  applicant  was  administratively  discharged  due  to   a   disability,
psychotic disorder not otherwise specified,  that  was  determined  to  have
existed prior to service and  was  not  permanently  aggravated  by  service
beyond the natural progression of the disease. The applicant, determined  to
be  competent  for  pay  and  records  by  his  psychiatrist,  accepted  the
recommendations of the Informal Physical Evaluation Board  after  counseling
by the Physical Evaluation Board Liaison Officer. He now requests change  of
records to show "medical separation" not further  specified  contending  his
condition did not exist prior to entering military service.

The reviewer concludes that the preponderance of the evidence of the  record
supports the findings of the  IPEB.  The  symptoms  described  as  occurring
during basic training, feeling distorted with  involuntary  eye  and  tongue
movement,  are  consistent  with  the  applicant's  schizophrenia  and   not
explainable by other conditions. The presence of  these  symptoms  while  in
basic training combined with evidence of job instability prior to  entry  to
active duty are consisted with a prolonged phase of manifestation  extending
prior to entry into  military  service.  The  indolent  progression  of  the
applicant's symptoms is completely consistent with the expected  progression
of the applicant's disease that would occur regardless of military  service.
There was  nothing  unique  about  military  service  that  would  lastingly
aggravate the natural  progression  of  this  disease.  The  excellent  duty
performance demonstrated by the  applicant  is  not  inconsistent  with  his
disease.

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 6  June
2005 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 not timely filed; however, it is in the interest  of
justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of an error or injustice warranting  a  change  in  his  narrative
reason for separation.  Applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however,  we
agree with the opinions and recommendation of the  BCMR  Medical  Consultant
and adopt his rationale as the basis for our conclusion that  the  applicant
has not been the victim of an error or injustice.   Shortly  after  entering
active  duty,  the  applicant  began  experiencing  anxiety   symptoms.   He
underwent several medical evaluations and was  diagnosed  with  a  psychotic
disorder not otherwise specified that was determined to have  existed  prior
to service and was not permanently aggravated by service beyond the  natural
progression of the disease.  The applicant’s case was processed through  the
medical disability evaluation system and it was determined  the  applicant’s
condition rendered him unfit for continued military service.  Therefore,  in
the absence of evidence to the contrary, we  find  no  compelling  basis  to
recommend granting the relief sought in this application

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 issues 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 a 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  BC-BC-2005-
00080 in Executive Session on 16 May 2006, under the provisions of  AFI  36-
2603:

                 Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
                 Ms. Janet I. Hassan, Member
                 Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Member



The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 14 Jan 04, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 7 Apr 06.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Apr 06.





                                             THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                             Chair