RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-02326
            INDEX CODES:  100.01, 100.05
                          100.06, 110.03

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  26 Jan 07

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty,
be  amended  in  Item  11  to  read  55150  -  Pavements   Maintenance
Specialist, 5 years, and  25150  -  Weather  Specialist,  1  year  and
6 months,  rather  than  25150  -  Weather  Specialist,  6  years  and
3 months.

His narrative reason for separation and separation program  designator
(SPD) and reenlistment eligibility (RE) codes be changed.

His DD Form  256,  Honorable  Discharge  Certificate,  be  changed  to
reflect his name as M--- E. P---, rather than M--- A. P---.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His Primary Specialty Number (Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC)), Title,
and Years and Months in Specialty, narrative  reason  for  separation,
and SPD and RE codes on his DD Form 214 are inaccurate, as is his name
on his DD Form 256.

He was wrongfully and illegally discharged from the Air Force and  his
military records should be amended to show that fact.

All documentation pertaining to paranoid  schizophrenia  contained  in
his military  records  are  false  and  the  product  of  intentional,
malicious acts of perjury committed against him by his command.

In support of his appeal,  the  applicant  provided  several  expanded
statements  and  extracts  from  his   military   personnel   records,
documentation from the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA), and other
documents associated with the matter under review.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 2 Dec 82 for  a  period
of four years in the grade airman first class (A1C).  He reenlisted on
23 Oct 86 for a period of four years in the grade of sergeant.

On 22 May 89, the applicant’s  commander  notified  him  that  he  was
recommending the applicant be discharged for a character and  behavior
disorder.  The reasons for the action were:  on or about 18 Mar 88, he
was late for commander’s call, as evidenced by a Memo For Record dated
21 Mar 88; on or about 21 Jun 88, he was arrested by civil authorities
for carrying a loaded concealed weapon, as evidenced by  a  Record  of
Individual Counseling dated 17 Aug 88; and, on or about 26 Apr 89,  he
was diagnosed as having an adjustment disorder with a  depressed  mood
(DSM III Code 309.00) and a schizoid  personality  disorder  (DSM  III
Code 301.20), as evidenced by a Report  of  Mental  Health  Evaluation
dated 26 Apr 89.  The applicant was  advised  of  his  rights  in  the
matter and that an  honorable  discharge  would  be  recommended.   He
waived his right to a hearing before an administrative discharge board
and did not submit statements in his own behalf.

On 26 May 89, the  office  of  the  Staff  Judge  Advocate  found  the
discharge case file to  be  legally  sufficient  and  recommended  the
applicant’s unconditional waiver be accepted and he  be  furnished  an
honorable discharge.

On 26 May 89, the discharge authority approved  the  discharge  action
and directed the applicant be furnished an honorable discharge.

On 2  Jun  89,  the  applicant  was  honorably  discharged  under  the
provisions of AFR  39-10  (Conditions  That  Interfere  with  Military
Service-Not  Disability-Character  and  Behavior)  in  the  grade   of
sergeant, and assigned an RE code of 2C (Involuntarily separated  with
an honorable discharge).  His Primary  Specialty  Number,  Title,  and
Years and Months in Specialty were 25150 - Weather Specialist, six (6)
years and three (3) months.  He  was  credited  with  six  years,  six
months, and one day of active service.

The remaining  relevant  facts  pertaining  to  this  application  are
contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate  offices  of  the
Air Force.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPAC  indicated  that  a  thorough  review  of  the  applicant's
personnel records supported that he possessed a primary AFSC of 55150,
Pavement Maintenance Specialist.  However, they also  determined  that
he only attained the 3-skill level in AFSC 251X0.  A copy of a  Report
on Individual Personnel (RIP) reflected the applicant's Primary  AFSC,
as of 8 May 89, as 55150 and a Second AFSC as 25130.  According to the
guidance  in  AFI  35-1,  Military  Personnel  Classification   Policy
(Officers and Airmen), dated  12 Apr  88,  the  Primary  AFSC  is  the
awarded AFSC in which an individual is best qualified to perform duty.
 The Second AFSC is the AFSC in which an  individual  is  second  best
qualified to perform duty.  Consequently, they determined  that  since
his Duty AFSC in May 89  was  as  a  Weather  Specialist,  if  he  had
attained his 5-ski11 level, his Primary AFSC would have been reflected
as 25150 rather than 55150.  Based on their findings, the  applicant’s
request is not completely substantiated.  Although they do not support
granting  the  specific  relief  sought  by  the  applicant,  they  do
recommend the applicant's DD Form 214, Item 11, be amended to  reflect
his AFSC as  55150,  Pavement  Maintenance  Specialist,  4  years,  11
months; and 25130, Apprentice Weather Specialist, 1  year,  5  months.
If the applicant can provide documentation substantiating that he  was
awarded the 5-skill level in AFSC 251X0,  they  would  reconsider  his
request.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPAC evaluation is at Exhibit C.

The Medical Consultant recommended denial of the  applicant’s  request
to change his narrative reason for separation noting the applicant was
administratively separated for  unsuitability  due  to  an  adjustment
disorder and schizoid personality disorder.  The applicant  mistakenly
believes he was diagnosed by Air Force mental health professionals  as
having paranoid schizophrenia.  There was no evidence in the available
records the applicant was ever diagnosed or thought to  have  paranoid
schizophrenia.   The  Air  Force   psychologist   diagnosed   schizoid
personality disorder based on a clinical interview, formal personality
testing,  and  collateral  occupational  information.   Although   the
diagnostic  terms  share  the  same  first   six   letters,   schizoid
personality disorder is not  schizophrenia.   A  civilian  psychiatric
evaluation in 2003 also concluded the applicant did not have, and most
likely never had manifested schizophrenia.

According to the Medical Consultant, the  Diagnostic  and  Statistical
Manual of Mental  Disorders  (DSM  IV)  defines  schizoid  personality
disorder as characterized by a pervasive pattern  of  detachment  from
social relationships and a restricted range of expression of  emotions
in interpersonal settings.  The pattern begins by early adulthood  and
is present in a variety of contexts.  The individual may be seen as  a
loner who lacks a desire for intimacy, is indifferent to opportunities
to develop  close  relationships.   They  have  no  close  friends  or
confidants except possibly  a  first  degree  relative.   Occupational
functioning may be impaired, particularly if interpersonal involvement
is required.  Individuals with this disorder may do  well  when  their
work enables them to work  in  relative  isolation.   In  response  to
stress, individuals with this  disorder  may  experience  episodes  of
relatively severe psychological symptoms.  Individuals who are  loners
may display personality traits  that  might  be  considered  schizoid.
Only  when  these  traits  are  inflexible  and  maladaptive   causing
significant functional  impairment  or  subjective  distress  do  they
constitute a schizoid personality disorder.  The evidence  of  record,
including  the  limited  post-service  information   and   psychiatric
evaluation, was not incompatible with the in-service diagnosis and did
not establish the applicant  does  not  have  a  schizoid  personality
disorder or  schizoid  personality  traits  that  blossom  when  under
stress.   Regardless,  the   evidence   of   record   clearly   showed
psychological symptoms that  rendered  the  applicant  unsuitable  for
continued military service.  The applicant was also diagnosed with  an
adjustment disorder with depressed mood by the Air Force psychologist.
 A diagnosis that  the  civilian  psychiatrist  opined  the  applicant
suffered  while  in  the   service.    An   adjustment   disorder   is
characterized  by  marked  psychological  distress  in   response   to
identifiable stressors that overcome the individual's ability to  cope
and is frequently associated with significant impairment in social and
occupational functioning.  The emotional and behavioral responses  may
be in excess of what would normally be expected given  the  nature  of
the stressors.  Manifestations can include  depressed  mood,  anxiety,
and disturbances of  conduct.   An  adjustment  disorder  when  severe
enough is unsuiting for  continued  military  service  and  cause  for
administrative discharge.  One of the key features  of  an  adjustment
disorder is that the condition resolves with relief of the  stressors.
The presence of a  personality  disorder  or  maladaptive  personality
traits predisposes and worsens an adjustment disorder.  Manifestations
(symptoms and behavior) of personality and  adjustment  disorders  wax
and wane over time depending on the nature  and  degree  of  stressors
present at any given time.   Individuals  who  develop  an  adjustment
disorder due to the stress of the routine rigors of  military  service
with or  without  concomitant  personal  issues  are  not  suited  for
military service and are subject to administrative discharge by  their
commander.

The  Medical  Consultant  noted  the  applicant  was  administratively
discharged  under  the  provisions  of  AFR  39-10,   paragraph   5-11
(Conditions That Interfere  With  Military  Service),  subparagraph  i
(character and behavior disorder).   He indicated that  character  and
behavior  disorders  under   this   provision   included   personality
disorders,  conduct  disorders,  adjustment  disorders,  disorders  of
impulse control and others.  A recommendation for discharge under this
provision required a report of  evaluation  by  a  psychiatrist  or  a
psychologist confirming the diagnosis of the unsuiting  condition  and
determining that it was so severe the member's ability to function  in
the military environment was significantly impaired.  The DD 214,  the
discharge certificate  of  members  discharged  under  this  provision
stated  the  narrative  reason  as  "conditions  that  interfere  with
military service - not a disability - character and behavior."  In the
years following the applicant's discharge, the  narrative  reason  for
members discharged  for  unsuiting  conditions  listed  the  narrative
reason  as  "personality  disorder"  whether  they  were  specifically
diagnosed with that condition or not.  The  narrative  reason  on  the
applicant's DD  214  is  a  more  general  statement  that  accurately
reflects  the  basis  for  his  discharge  and  lacks   the   negative
connotation of the more recently used term "personality disorder" even
though  this  would  also  be  accurate  based  on   the   Air   Force
psychologist's diagnosis.  In the Medical  Consultant’s  opinion,  the
action  and  disposition  in  this  case  were  proper  and  equitable
reflecting compliance with Air Force  directives  that  implement  the
law, and that no change in the records is warranted.

A complete copy of the Medical Consultant’s evaluation is  at  Exhibit
D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant reviewed the  advisory  opinion  and  furnished  a  response
indicating he did not agree with  the  Medical  Consultant’s  advisory
opinion which he  believes  was  biased.   The  evidence  against  him
concerning his mental state was based on a short period of time.   The
diagnoses of schizoid personality  disorder  and  adjustment  disorder
were based on false and unsubstantiated information.  The evidence  he
has presented as proof that he never  had  any  mental  disorders  was
compiled over a time period of  several  years  and  is  supported  by
individuals from all walks of  life.   He  has  nothing  more  to  add
regarding this matter.  However, he has discovered an error concerning
an administrative correction to his AFSC.   He  has  already  provided
documentation with his application showing that his records should  be
corrected to show an AFSC of 25150,  Weather  Specialist,  not  25130,
Apprentice.

Applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

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.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of error or injustice  concerning  the  applicant’s  request
that his DD Form 256 be corrected to reflect a  change  to  his  name,
particularly, his middle initial.  After  a  thorough  review  of  the
evidence of record, to  include  the  applicant’s  military  personnel
records, we are persuaded that any and all  Air  Force  documents  and
references using his name should be changed to reflect his name as M---
 E. P---, rather than M -- A. P---.

4.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented  to  demonstrate
the  existence  of  error  or  injustice  regarding  the   applicant’s
remaining requests.

      a.  Concerning the applicant’s request that his narrative reason
for separation and separation and RE Codes be changed, the evidence of
record indicates he was involuntarily discharged for a  character  and
behavior disorder, with a corresponding separation code  of  HFX,  and
was assigned an RE code of 2C.  No evidence has  been  presented  that
would lead us to believe the reason for his separation and  separation
code were improper or contrary to the governing directives under which
they were effected, or that the RE code was inappropriately  assigned.
In view of the foregoing, and in the absence of sufficient evidence to
the contrary, the applicant’s requests are not favorably considered.

      b.  The applicant’s request that his DD Form 214 be  amended  in
Item 11 to reflect his appropriate AFSCs and correct years and  months
was noted.  After a review of the evidence presented, it appears  that
these changes have already been  accomplished  administratively.   The
applicant  believes  additional  corrective   action   is   necessary.
Specifically, he requests that his  records  should  be  corrected  to
reflect his AFSC as  25150  (Weather  Specialist)  rather  than  25130
(Apprentice Weather Specialist).  However, we are not persuaded by the
evidence presented that further correction to his AFSC is appropriate,
and believe the aforementioned changes have provided  him  proper  and
fitting relief.  In view of the  foregoing,  and  in  the  absence  of
sufficient evidence to the contrary, the applicant’s  request  for  an
additional change to his AFSC is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the  Department  of  the  Air  Force
relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that any and all Air Force
documents and references using his name reflect M--- E.  P---,  rather
than M--- A. P---.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2005-02326 in Executive Session on 12 Jan 06, under the provisions  of
AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Laurence M. Groner, Panel Chair
      Ms. LeLoy W. Cottrell, Member
      Ms. Cheryl V. Jacobson, Member

All members  voted  to  correct  the  records,  as  recommended.   The
following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 Jul 05, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAC, dated 28 Sep 05.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, Medical Consultant, dated 9 Nov 05.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Nov 05.
     Exhibit F.  Letter, applicant, dated 27 Nov 05, w/atchs.




                                   LAURENCE M. GRONER
                                   Panel Chair







AFBCMR BC-2005-02326




MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

      Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air
Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority
of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is
directed that:

      The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air
Force relating to , be corrected to show that any and all Air Force
documents and references using his name reflect M--- E. P---, rather
than M--- A. P---.







    JOE G. LINEBERGER

    Director

    Air Force Review Boards Agency