RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-00176
            INDEX CODE:  110.02

      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL: NONE


      XXXXXXX    HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  16 JULY 2006

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His narrative reason of “personality disorder” for separation be changed.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His discharge from the Air Force was unfair  because  of  situations  beyond
his control. He wants his medical records reevaluated to determine  that  he
has no personality disorder. There is no way  after  four  years  anyone  in
good faith could determine that he had a pre-existing personality disorder.

In support of his application, applicant  provides  a  letter  from  his  MA
provider, a personal letter, and DD Form 293, Application for the Review  of
Discharge or Dismissal From the Armed Forces of the United States

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the  Regular  Air  Force  on  5  April  2000.  He  was
progressively promoted to the grade of senior airman  (E-4)  having  assumed
that grade effective and with a date of rank of   5 August 2002.

On 2 June 2004, the applicant was notified by  his  commander  that  he  was
recommending he be discharged from  the  Air  Force  for  a  condition  that
interferes  with  military  service;  Sleepwalking  and  Mental   Disorders-
Personality Disorder under the provisions of AFPD  36-32  and  AFI  36-3208,
paragraphs 5.11.2 and 5.11.9.1.  The specific reasons for this action:

       (1)  It  has  been  determined  he  has  a   mental   disorder   that
significantly affects his ability to serve in the military.  This  is  based
on the determination of his recent mental health evaluation  that  diagnosis
him with a personality disorder that  is  so  severe  that  his  ability  to
function effectively in the military environment is  significantly  impaired
is the correct recommendation and he has a history of sleepwalking.

      (2)  On or about 28 October 2003, the applicant was  derelict  in  the
performance of his duties when he failed to go at  the  time  prescribed  to
his appointed place of duty, to wit:  his  dental  appointment  at  Dentrust
Dental, Aurora, Colorado. For this action he received a Letter of  Reprimand
dated 31 October 2003.

      (3)  On or about 8 August 2003, the applicant  failed  to  go  at  the
time prescribed to his appointed place  of  duty,  to  wit:  460th  Security
Forces Squadron, Buckley Air  Force  Base,  Colorado.  For  this  action  he
received a Letter of Counseling.

      (4)  On or about 20 November 2002, the applicant failed to go  at  the
time  prescribed  to  his  appointed  place  of  duty,  to  wit:   mandatory
Commander’s Call at the 460th Security Forces Squadron,  Buckley  Air  Force
Base, Colorado. For this action he received an MFR/Verbal  Counseling  dated
22 November 2002.

      (5)  On or about 1 June 2002,  the  applicant  failed  both  dormitory
room inspection and failed to go at the time  prescribed  to  his  appointed
place of duty, to wit: 460th Security Forces  Squadron,  Buckley  Air  Force
Base, Colorado. For this action he received a Letter of  Reprimand  dated  3
June 2002.

      (6)  On or about 13 November 2001, the applicant was derelict  in  the
performance of his duties when he failed to go at  the  time  prescribed  to
his appointed place of duty, to wit:  his  dental  appointment  at  Dentrust
Dental,  Aurora,  Colorado.  For  this  action  he  received  a   MFR/Verbal
Counseling dated 14 November 2001.

On 2 June 2004, the commander advised the applicant of his right to  consult
legal counsel, to submit statements in his own behalf, or waive  his  rights
after consulting with counsel.

On 7 June 2004, the commander directed the applicant be discharged from  the
United States Air Force with an honorable discharge without the  opportunity
for probation and rehabilitation.

On 10 June 2004, applicant was discharged under the provisions of  AFPD  36-
32  and  AFI  36-3208,  Sleepwalking  and  Mental  Disorders  -  Personality
Disorder, with service characterized as honorable.  He  served  4  years,  2
months and 6 days of total active military service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant is of the opinion that no change in the  records
is  warranted.   The  applicant   was   administratively   separated   under
provisions  for  unsuitability  due  to  personality  disorder  after  being
returned early from a deployment due to  erratic  behavior  including  sleep
walking, visual hallucinations, and comments interpreted by a supervisor  as
a veiled threat against the supervisor. The  applicant  submits  a  civilian
psychological exam concluding the applicant  does  not  have  a  personality
disorder and his problems were due to stress, medication and lack of sleep.

Personality  disorders  are  enduring  patterns  of  maladjustment  in   the
individual’s personality structure which  are  not  medically  disqualifying
but may render the individual unsuitable for further  military  service  and
may  be  cause  for  administrative  discharge  by  the  individual’s   unit
commander. A Personality Disorder is an enduring pattern of thinking,  inner
experience, feeling and  behaving  that  is  pervasive  and  inflexible,  is
relatively stable over time, deviates from the individual’s cultural  norms,
and  causes  distress  or  impairment  in   social   and   or   occupational
functioning.  The  features  of  a  Personality  Disorder   usually   become
recognizable  during  adolescence  or  early   adult   life.   Symptoms   of
personality disorders are frequently  exacerbated  by  stress  and  may  not
cause significant problems or be recognized  until  stressful  circumstances
result in occupational or  social  problems.  Manifestations  (symptoms  and
behavior), wax and wane over time depending on  the  nature  and  degree  of
stressors present at any time.  Often the nature  of  military  duty  places
greater pressures on the individual than on  civilians  in  similar  duties,
and these disorders frequently become more manifest.

The preponderance of evidence in the records clearly  supports  a  diagnosis
of  personality  disorder  that  rendered  the  applicant   unsuitable   for
continued  military  service.  His  documented  history  of  long   standing
behaviors  and  psychological  problems   that   resulted   in   significant
impairment of occupational functioning indicates that  he  is  at  risk  for
recurrent problems under similar circumstances of military occupational  and
personal  stress.  Evidence  of  the  record  clearly   documents   problems
consistent with maladaptive personality traits  pre-dating  his  deployment.
The evidence of the record  clearly  shows  that  the  applicant  manifested
behaviors and  psychological  symptoms  that  rendered  him  unsuitable  for
military service and that those behaviors and symptoms  were  aggravated  by
the mental and physical stresses of deployment to a combat zone.  A  history
of a personality disorder or maladaptive traits  severe  enough  to  warrant
administrative discharge is permanently disqualifying for reenlistment  into
the military. The evidence submitted by the applicant does not overcome  the
evidence of service records or establish an error.  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.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded  to  the  applicant  on  23
December 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  error  or  injustice.   We  took  notice  of  the  applicant's
complete submission in judging the merits of the  case;  however,  we  agree
with the opinion and recommendation of the Medical Consultant and adopt  his
rationale as the basis for our decision that the  applicant  has  failed  to
sustain his burden to show that he  has  suffered  either  an  error  or  an
injustice.  With respect to the applicant’s request for a reevaluation,  the
Board notes the mental health record indicated the applicant  was  diagnosed
with  Axis  II,  Personality   Disorder,   Not   Otherwise   Specified   and
demonstrated a history of behaviors that were consistent  with  a  diagnosis
of  a  personality  disorder.  Often,  mental  health  evaluations  obtained
following  separation  are  performed  without  the  benefit  of  long  term
occupational or social historical information critical  to  identifying  the
behavioral patterns characteristics of personality disorder. The  evaluation
the applicant sought in November 2004 was a  one  time  interview,  did  not
include psychological testing, was performed nearly  a  year  after  he  was
deployed to a combat zone and does not exclude the diagnosis of  personality
disorder. The narrative reason for separation  of  personality  disorder  in
this case is appropriate.  Therefore, in the  absence  of  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  Docket  Number  BC-2004-01065
in Executive Session on 8 February 2006, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                 Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
                 Ms. Dorothy P. Loeb, Member
                 Ms. Barbara R. Murray, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 6 Jan 05, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 19 Dec 05.
      Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Dec 05.




      THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
      Chair