Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02567
Original file (BC-2011-02567.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02567 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

______________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

Her narrative reason for separation be changed from “Conditions 
Not a Disability” to “Service Connected Disability - 
30 percent.” 

 

______________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

Shortly after she was discharged she received a service 
connected disability rating due to the nature of her 
separation. 

 

She became aware that she was not receiving entitled benefits 
due to the narrative reason for separation reflected on her DD 
Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. 

 

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. 

 

______________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 26 Apr 2000, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air 
Force. 

 

On 5 Dec 2002, her commander notified her he was recommending 
she be discharged under the provisions of AFPD 36-32, Military 
Retirements and Separations and AFI 36-3208, Administrative 
Separation of Airmen. The reason for his proposed action was 
on 27 Sep 2002, she self-referred to the Life Skills Support 
Center and began treatment for depression. Since that time, 
she was seen at the clinic for alcohol abuse and a suicide 
attempt on 4 Oct 2002. Following an additional alcohol related 
incident on 28 Oct 2002, which was accompanied by suicidal 
gestures, the commander requested her medical and mental health 
records be reviewed for determination of possible severe mental 
health conditions underlying her destructive behavior. 

 

In accordance with the commander’s request, a psychologist, 
psychiatrist, and the Chief, Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention 
and Treatment (ADAPT), evaluated her records. Based on their 
assessment, she did not have a psychiatric condition that 
required a medical evaluation board or that rendered her 


incompetent for pay and records. However, she did possess a 
Borderline Personality Disorder of such severity as to preclude 
adequate military service. All mental health professionals 
queried recommended that she be expeditiously administratively 
discharged. 

 

On 5 Dec 2002, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the 
discharge notification. 

 

In an undated letter, the Staff Judge Advocate found the 
discharge legally sufficient. 

 

On 19 Dec 2002, she was honorably discharged. Her narrative 
reason for separation was “Conditions Not a Disability.” 

 

______________________________________________________________ 

 

THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial. DPSOR states they found no 
evidence of error or injustice in the processing of the 
applicant’s discharge. Based on the documentation in the 
master personnel records, the discharge to include the 
narrative reason for separation and separation code was 
consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of 
the discharge instruction and was within the discretion of the 
discharge authority. 

 

The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial. The Medical 
Consultant acknowledges that the applicant carried a co-morbid 
diagnosis of Depressive Disorder. However, the mental health 
professional who evaluated her determined that her primary 
diagnosis was Borderline Personality Disorder and that she had 
an S4T profile, secondary to her alcohol abuse and involvement 
in the ADAPT program. Consequently, a determination was made 
that it was her Personality Disorder and alcohol abuse, and not 
her co-morbid diagnosis of Depressive Disorder, which 
significantly interfered with her ability to perform military 
service. 

 

The applicant's factual history shows a recurrent problem with 
alcohol abuse and maladaptive personality traits. She was 
discharged under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, which 
authorizes the involuntary separation of airmen that suffer 
from Mental Disorders that are not considered a disability; 
however that are so severe that the member's ability to 
function effectively in the military environment is 
significantly impaired. 

 

Based on a mental health assessment, it was determined that she 
did not have a psychiatric condition that required a Medical 
Evaluation Board. However, she did possess a Borderline 


Personality Disorder, of such severity as to preclude adequate 
military service. Personality Disorders and Adjustment 
Disorders are not considered compensable disabilities under AFI 
36-3212, Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, and 
Separation or DODI 1332.38, Physical Disability Evaluation. 
Because of the nature of her disorder, her commander felt an 
honorable separation was appropriate acknowledging that it 
precludes the applicant from re-entering the service. 

 

Addressing the applicant’s implicit desire for a medical 
separation, the military Disability Evaluation System (DES), 
established to maintain a fit and vital fighting force, can by 
law, under Title 10, United States Code (U.S.C.), only offer 
compensation for those service incurred diseases or injuries 
which specifically rendered a member unfit for continued active 
service and were the cause for career termination; and then 
only for the degree of impairment present at the time of 
separation and not based on future occurrences. Again, her 
Personality Disorder is not a compensable disability. 

 

On the other hand, operating under a different set of laws 
(Title 38, U.S.C.), with a different purpose, the Department of 
Veterans Affairs (DVA) is authorized to offer compensation for 
any medical condition determined service incurred, without 
regard to [and independent of] its demonstrated or proven 
impact upon a service member’s retainability, fitness to serve, 
or narrative reason for release from military service. With 
this in mind, Title 38, U.S.C., which governs the DVA 
compensation system, was written to allow awarding compensation 
ratings for any conditions with a nexus with military service. 
This is the reason why an individual can be released from 
active military service for one reason and yet sometime 
thereafter receive a compensation rating from the DVA for a 
medical condition considered service-connected, but which was 
not militarily unfitting during the period of active service. 
The Medical Consultant opines the applicant has not met the 
burden of proof of error or injustice that warrants the desired 
change of the record. 

 

The complete BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit 
D. 

 

______________________________________________________________ 

 

 

 


 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

Prior to July 2002 she was a model airman, who joined the Air 
Force with the intention of retiring like her father. 

 

Prior to receiving a Letter of Counseling for her participation 
in an unprofessional relationship, she attempted to obtain a 
Humanitarian Assignment to escape a situation that had become 
intolerable. She was sexually harassed by her boss and tried 
to handle it like an adult. Five months after the sexual 
harassment became public; she changed from a model airman to a 
suicidal person with borderline personality disorder. She 
self-mutilated, drank to excess, had anger issues, had no self-
worth, and was depressed. She could not mentally or physically 
endure anymore and wanted to be separated from the military. 

 

She should have been discharged with a service connected 
disability. She suffers from depression, suicidal ideations, 
anger issues, and has a personality disorder, which began 
during her time in the military and has continued after her 
separation. 

 

Her complete response 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. 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 opinions and 
recommendations of the Air Force office of primary 
responsibility and the BMCR Medical Consultant and adopt their 
rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not 
been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, in the 
absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no 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-
2012-02567 in Executive Session on 7 Mar 2013, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 14 Jun 2012. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 6 Aug 2012. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 28 Jan 

 2013. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 4 Feb 2013. 

 Exhibit F. Letter, Applicant, dated 11 Feb 2013. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair 

 

 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 02567

    Original file (BC 2012 02567.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Since that time, she was seen at the clinic for alcohol abuse and a suicide attempt on 4 Oct 2002. However, the mental health professional who evaluated her determined that her primary diagnosis was Borderline Personality Disorder and that she had an S4T profile, secondary to her alcohol abuse and involvement in the ADAPT program. She suffers from depression, suicidal ideations, anger issues, and has a personality disorder, which began during her time in the military and has continued...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-00300

    Original file (BC-2005-00300.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    Although the mental health records are not available for review (only limited entries in the main service medical record), the Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) narrative summary dated June 28, 2002 provides the most complete psychiatric summary available in the case file while she was on active duty. Had the Physical Evaluation Board concluded that service aggravated her condition, rating deductions for existing prior to service symptoms and for non-compensable personality...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03399

    Original file (BC-2012-03399.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 27 August 2007, the applicant was notified of her commander’s intent to recommend she be discharged from the Air Force for conditions that interfered with military service: Mental Disorders – Adjustment Disorder. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application is contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force, which are attached at Exhibits C and Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00612

    Original file (BC 2014 00612.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial of the applicant’s request to be granted a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) and removal of the personality disorder diagnosis. A complete copy of the AFBCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit D. AFBCMR Clinical Psychology Consultant recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice that incurred when the applicant was administratively discharged from the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02157

    Original file (BC-2012-02157.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02157 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her narrative reason for separation be changed from adjustment disorder to medically retired. On 21 May 2009, she was notified of her commander’s intent to discharge her from the Air Force for Conditions that Interfere with Military Service: Mental...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00120

    Original file (BC-2013-00120.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00120 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her involuntary discharge (under honorable conditions) for personality disorder be changed to a medical separation for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The Medical Consultant states that while the evidence is not supportive of a medical...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02955

    Original file (BC-2011-02955.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02955 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her narrative reason for separation be changed from personality disorder to medical discharge. She was discharged for a diagnosed personality disorder however, at the time of the diagnosis she was receiving medical treatment from Mental Health and was...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-03325

    Original file (PD-2014-03325.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The MEB forwarded the following Axis I conditions to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AFI 48-123 and 44-113:“maj depressive disorder/recurrent/moderate; anxiety disorder NOS; alcohol dep.” The MEB also forwarded “borderline personality traits” as an Axis II condition.No other conditions were submitted by the MEB.The PEB adjudicated the referred Axis I conditions, less the alcohol dependence condition, as a single unfitting condition (for rating purposes), “major depressive disorder...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03637

    Original file (BC 2013 03637.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    At the time, he thought it was the right diagnosis but now has evidence to support he has a bipolar disorder. The military has a history of discharging veterans with a diagnosis of personality disorder. Nevertheless, in view of the applicant’s co-morbid service diagnosis of adjustment disorder, the Board may elect to remove the lifelong label of “Personality Disorder” with consideration of a change to “Secretarial Authority.” The complete BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02771

    Original file (BC-2007-02771.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-02771 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her bad conduct discharge (BCD) be changed to honorable under medical conditions. The complete JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C. The BCMR Medical Consultant opines a change to the applicant's service characterization of General...