RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-03151 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

1. Her narrative reason for separation “Personality Disorder” be 
changed to “medical discharge.” 

 

2. Her records be corrected to reflect service in Saudi Arabia. 
(A DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active 
Duty, does not specify exact locations of Foreign Service – Her 
Foreign Service in Saudi Arabia from 21 Aug to 7 Dec 02 has been 
verified. The applicant was provided a letter to use as proof of 
“boots on ground” in Saudi Arabia.) 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

Her medical diagnosis “Personality Disorder” gives others a 
reason to look at her differently. It is embarrassing for her to 
show her DD Form 214. 

 

In support of her request, the applicant provides copies of her 
DD Form 214, Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal Certificate, and 
the eligibility criteria for award of the AFEM. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 12 Jan 95, the applicant entered active duty in the Regular 
Air Force. She served as a security forces member, and her 
highest grade held was staff sergeant. 

 

On 8 Jun 05, the applicant was notified by her squadron commander 
that he was recommending her discharge from the Air Force for a 
condition that interfered with military service, specifically a 
mental disorder. The reason for the proposed action was: On 
24 May 05, the applicant was diagnosed with a Personality 
Disorder and Generalized Anxiety Disorder that rendered her unfit 
for duty. 

 

The applicant was referred to the Life Skills Support Center, for 
anxiety management. The Life Skills Support Center report 


indicated she met the criteria for diagnosis of Personality 
Disorder, Not Otherwise Specified, with Obsessive Compulsive and 
Histrionic Traits. In addition, the applicant met the criteria 
for Generalized Anxiety Disorder; however, the latter diagnosis 
and her ongoing problems with family, work reliability and 
functioning are a likely result of her underlying personality 
disorder conflicting with her environment. 

 

It was determined she did not have a psychiatric disorder that 
required action through medical channels, and her ongoing work 
problems and personal problems strongly suggested she was 
temperamentally and emotionally unsuited for continued military 
service. 

 

On 8 Jun 05, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the discharge 
notification and, after consulting with counsel, waived her right 
to a hearing before an administrative discharge board, and did 
not submit statements in her own behalf. 

 

On 16 Jun 05, the base legal office found the case legally 
sufficient to support the basis for discharge and recommended an 
honorable service characterization. On 27 Jun 05, the discharge 
authority approved the discharge. 

 

On 29 Jun 05, the applicant was honorably discharged by reason of 
Personality Disorder, after serving on active duty for a period 
of 10 years, 5 months, and 7 days. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial. DPSOS states based on the 
documentation on file in the master personnel records, the 
discharge, to include her “Narrative Reason for Separation” was 
consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of 
the discharge instruction and was within the discretion of the 
discharge authority. 

 

DPSOS states a medical evaluation revealed the presence of a 
Personality Disorder which was concurrently preventing the 
applicant from moving forward in treatment and functioning 
effectively in her duty position. Although the applicant was 
fully qualified for worldwide assignment, she had lost the 
confidence of her commander. The medical evaluation stated the 
applicant had poor coping skills and was characterized as one who 
is temperamentally and emotionally unsuited for military service. 

 

Although the applicant is apparently succeeding and coping well 
in her civilian capacity, it does not change the basis for which 
she was discharged from the Air Force. The military environment 
is unique and stressors encountered in such an environment may 
not appear or surface when removed from the military environment. 


 

The complete DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial of the applicant’s 
request to change her narrative reason for separation from 
Personality Disorder to a medical discharge; however, recommends 
the Board consider granting relief by changing the narrative 
reason for separation to “Secretarial Authority.” 

 

The Medical Consultant states the applicant was diagnosed with an Anxiety Disorder and a Personality Disorder. Although the Anxiety Disorder was potentially disqualifying and could warrant 
processing through the Military Disability Evaluation System, the 
evaluating military mental health provider determined that it was 
the applicant’s underlying noncompensable Axis II Personality 
Disorder, and not her Anxiety Disorder, which significantly 
interfered with her ability to perform her military duties and to 
carry out recommended therapies. Indeed, the applicant was 
administratively discharged for a mental condition that is 
considered unsuitable for military service, under the provisions 
of AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, paragraph 
5.11.9 Mental Disorders. 

 

The Medical Consultant concedes that professional opinions may 
vary regarding the comparative influence of the applicant’s Personality Disorder versus the Anxiety Disorder upon her ability 
to function in the military environment. Nevertheless, the 
Medical Consultant found no evidence of an error or injustice to 
warrant the desired changed of record. Indeed, had the 
applicant’s case been referred to a Physical Evaluation Board for 
an assessment of her fitness to serve, based upon the assessment 
by her military mental health provider, the Anxiety Disorder 
would not have been found unfitting, and the case would have been 
returned for processing under other administrative directives, 
e.g., AFI 36-3208, due to the Personality Disorder. 

 

The Board may consider granting the applicant relief, after 
collectively considering her life circumstances and the 
concurrent stressors she experienced (single parenthood, somewhat 
special needs child, interrupted sleep, financial stressors, 
supervisory responsibilities, and job training requirements; 
either of which could have independently formed the basis for a 
separation if not properly met); and her apparent recovery with 
the absence of an Axis I diagnosis and the uncertainty 
(“deferred”) of an Axis II diagnosis since release from military 
service. 

 

The Medical Consultant states that the narrative reason for 
separation of Personality Disorder on her DD Form 214 may pose a 
lifelong injustice. As such, he recommends it be changed to 
“Secretarial Authority.” 

 

The complete BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit 
D. 


 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

On 9 Aug 11, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded 
to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days. To date, 
a response has not been received (Exhibit E). 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 an error or injustice to warrant 
partial relief. After a thorough review of facts and 
circumstances of this case, no evidence has been presented which 
shows to our satisfaction the applicant was improperly diagnosed 
or that her separation was in error or contrary to the prevailing 
instruction. That said, we do not believe she should have 
received a medical discharge. However, after considering the 
evidence of record and the analysis provided by the Medical 
Consultant, we believe in order to preclude any further injustice 
to the applicant, her narrative reason for separation should be 
changed to Secretarial Authority. As noted above, the applicant 
has been provided a “boots on the ground” letter that reflects 
her service in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Therefore, in view 
of the above, we recommend her records be corrected as indicated 
below. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: 

 

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force 
relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 29 June 2005, 
she was honorably discharged with a narrative reason for 
separation of “Secretarial Authority” rather than “Personality 
Disorder,” and separation code of “KFF” rather than “HFX.” 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2010-03151 in Executive Session on 13 Sep 11, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

, Panel Chair 


, Member 

, Member 

 

All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The 
following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number 
BC-2010-03151 was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 23 Aug 10. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 7 Mar 11. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 4 Aug 11. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Aug 11. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair