RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-03582
            INDEX CODE:  110.02

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form  22,  Report  of  Separation  and
Record of Service,  be  changed  by  removing  the  comment  Medically
Disqualified, his Separation Program Designator (SPD) Code be changed,
and his Reenlistment Eligibility be changed to  Eligible  rather  than
Ineligible.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

During spring 2001, he was going through some stressful  periods.   He
received counseling and medication to help him cope with  anxiety  and
stress he was experiencing.  He was eventually dosed very high on  one
medication that did not seem to work for him.  He was taken  off  that
medication and put on another.  The second  medication  actually  left
him feeling worse.  He was not sure whether or not he was experiencing
“withdrawal” of some type from the previous medicine or whether or not
his current medication was causing the problems.  In July 2001, he was
hospitalized for suicidal ideations. His  psychiatrist  increased  the
medication and put him on some others.  He was diagnosed with  bipolar
affective disorder.  In mid to late August 2001, he entered  a  state-
level facility for treatment and was released on 7 September 2001.  He
was  subsequently  involuntarily  discharged  from  the  Wyoming   Air
National Guard  (WYANG)  with  an  SPD  of  “KNF”,  Not  Eligible  for
Worldwide Deployment – Medical  Disqualification.   His  RE  code  was
listed as “Ineligible.”  He believes his diagnosis was wrong, that  he
was suffering from temporary stress due to personal problems, a  heavy
workload, his military obligations, attending college  part  time  and
side effects of the medication he was  taking.   Since  2001,  he  had
significantly reduced his medicine intake and has been medication-free
for the past three years.  He has  been  employed  continuously  since
July 2002 and had finished his college degree and  has  started  on  a
Master’s  degree.   A  neuro-psychologist  recently   accomplished   a
forensic evaluation that  took  place  over  several  visits  and  has
concluded he does not suffer from bipolar affective  disorder  or  any
other condition that might require  medication.   He  believes  he  is
currently “fit for duty” and desires the opportunity  to  enlist  with
the Army, Air Force or with a Reserve component.

In support of his  appeal,  the  applicant  has  provided  a  personal
statement, and copies of his NGB Form 22, his discharge paperwork, and
medical records.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

He  enlisted  in  the  Army  on  3  November  1987  and  served  until
3 September 1996 when he was  honorably  discharged.   On  4 September
1996, he enlisted with the Alaska ANG (AKANG)  and  served  with  them
until 14 March 2000 when he transferred to the WYANG.  Throughout  his
years of service he was progressively promoted to the grade  of  staff
sergeant with a date of rank (DOR) of 4 September 1996.   On  26  July
2002, he was found medically disqualified for worldwide duty  and  was
subsequently honorably discharged  effective  25 November  2002  after
having served approximately 14 years of satisfactory service towards a
Reserve retirement.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ANG/A1POF recommends denial.  A1POF contends he was  discharged  after
having been thoroughly evaluated and diagnosed with bipolar  affective
disorder.  A1POF states  he  was  separated  in  accordance  with  all
applicable regulations.  No error  or  injustice  could  be  found  to
support his request to change his NGB Form 22 in  the  manner  he  has
requested.

A1POF’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant agrees with the ANG that his discharge was handled with  all
applicable regulations, however, the WYANG acted on “bad”  information
provided by his doctor.   While  the  original  information  from  his
doctor included he suffered from a bi-polar disorder, he has presented
new evidence in his application that shows he was misdiagnosed and has
no such condition.  A full forensic  psychological  evaluation  and  a
follow-up examination not  only  bear  this  out  but  illustrate  his
misdiagnosis.  He contends he was too young at the age of 38  to  have
contracted a bipolar disorder and instead asserts he suffered  from  a
“situation” disorder based on many personal changes he was  undergoing
at the time.  He  was  deeply  in  debt,  working  for  the  ANG,  and
attending school on up to a  fulltime  status.   While  he  admits  he
handled these situations poorly, the resultant stress and anxiety  led
him to seek counseling that eventually led  to  him  being  prescribed
medication.  It was only after he began taking the medication that  he
began to experience severe negative  reactions.   The  reactions  were
translated  inappropriately  as   bi-polar   disorder   and   he   was
subsequently found not worldwide deployable and duly  discharged.   He
has not taken any psychological and psychiatric medications for almost
four years with no negative effects whatsoever.  For this reason it is
apparent to him that he is not suffering from bi-polar  disorder.   He
feels his situation is no  different  from  other  military  personnel
taken off worldwide  status  due  perhaps  to  broken  bones  or  even
pregnancy.   Their  worldwide  unavailability  is  temporary  and   is
restored when whatever malady they suffer from has resolved.  He would
like the Board  to  consider  his  bipolar  disorder  as  having  been
misdiagnosed and  whatever  malady  he  suffered  from  has  now  been
resolved.  Therefore, he would appreciate the Board changing  his  SPD
code to one that would allow him to reenlist.

_________________________________________________________________

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.  After a thorough review  of  the
evidence of record and applicant's submission, we  are  not  persuaded
that his uncorroborated assertions of being medicine and symptom free,
in  and  by  themselves,  sufficiently  persuasive  to  override   the
rationale provided by the Air Force.  Therefore,  we  agree  with  the
opinion and recommendation of the Air National Guard office of primary
responsibility and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for  our
decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of having
suffered either an error  or  injustice.   While  he  focused  on  his
alleged misdiagnosis  of  bipolar  disorder  as  the  reason  for  his
discharge and ineligibility for reenlistment, we noted the  additional
diagnosis of Recurrent Major Depression and noticed several  instances
in his record where he was hospitalized  for  suicide  attempts.   Any
difference of opinion between the Air Force and civilian mental health
professionals is still whether or not  the  applicant’s  condition  is
disqualifying for military service.  While the applicant appears to be
doing well,  there  is  no  evidence  that  he  would  not  experience
recurring symptoms when exposed to the  rigors  of  military  service.
Therefore, in the absence of persuasive 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2005-03582 in Executive Session on 11 July 2006, under the  provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Panel Chair
      Ms. Mary C. Puckett, Member
      Ms. Josephine L Davis, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 18 Nov 05, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, ANG/A1POF, dated 10 May 06.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 May 06.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, APPLICANT, dated 14 Jun 06, w/atch.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Panel Chair