RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:			   DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00185

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED: NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

She be reinstated into the Air Force, or as an alternative, she 
be reinstated into the Air Force Reserve or the Air National 
Guard.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She was separated from the Air Force after 15 years of service 
for adjustment disorder.  She asks the Board to consider 
reinstating her into the Air Force.  She was told adjustment 
disorder only lasts three to five months and since the disorder 
is only temporary, she feels she was erroneously separated.

She deployed while stationed at Charleston Air Force Base, South 
Carolina and had orders to FE Warren Air Force Base, Wyoming 
upon her return.  Because her family was already at FE Warren, a 
deal was made that she would take her post-deployment 
reintegration time there.  She had not seen her family in nine 
months and was elated about the agreement to spend her 
reintegration time there.

When she arrived at FE Warren, she was sent to the missile field 
rather than the 90th Force Support Squadron as stated on her 
orders.  Life on the missile field was lonely as it required 
that she worked three to five days at a time.  This meant she 
could only see her family a couple times a week.  

Prior to her diagnosis of adjustment disorder, she tried to 
explain to her leadership what she was feeling and going 
through.  She saw people around her receiving help for various 
things; however, she did not feel that same support.  No one had 
time to help her.

Her family life is now stable and other adjustments have been 
made.  She wants to be like the rest of her family and retire 
with dignity.  The military is in her blood and she does not 
want to disappoint her family.  She just wants to defend her 
country once again.

In support of this appeal, the applicant provides a personal 
statement, documentation from her master personnel records and 
e-mail correspondence.

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 3 September 
1997.  On 22 June 2012, she was notified of her commander’s 
intent to discharge her from the Air Force for Conditions that 
Interfere with Military Service:  Mental Disorder – Personality 
Disorder and Adjustment Disorder.  Specifically, she was 
diagnosed with Paranoid Personality Disorder and an Adjustment 
Disorder with mixed disturbance of emotions and conduct, 
recurrent.  It was concluded that the personality disorder and 
adjustment disorder were of such a severity that it impaired her 
ability to function effectively in a military environment.

The applicant acknowledged her right to present her case to an 
administrative discharge board, to be represented by military 
counsel and to submit matters on her behalf to be considered by 
the discharge board.  She did not waive her right to a board 
hearing and or counsel.  She also submitted matters on her 
behalf.  On 7 August 2012, the discharge board found the 
applicant did have an adjustment disorder; however, they found 
that she did not have a paranoid personality disorder.  The 
Board also found the disorder was so severe that her ability to 
function effectively in a military environment was significantly 
impaired.  They recommended that she be discharged with an 
honorable service characterization.  She was not offered 
probation and rehabilitation.

On 22 October 2012, the commander approved the discharge and 
directed she be separated with an honorable discharge.  Her 
narrative reason for separation is listed as Adjustment 
Disorder.

Upon review of her records, AFPC/DPSID confirmed the applicant’s 
record should reflect she was awarded the Air Force Good Conduct 
Medal with three Bronze Oak Leaf Clusters.  Her records will be 
updated accordingly.

________________________________________________________________






AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial of reinstatement into the Air 
Force.  The applicant’s commander initiated a command directed 
evaluation of her following a suicide attempt on 12 January 
2012.  She was diagnosed with Axis II (Paranoid Personality 
Disorder) of such a severity that her ability to function 
effectively in a military environment was significantly 
impaired.  She was deemed to be at a significant increased 
lifetime risk for impulsive suicide attempt and completion.  She 
was evaluated for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD); 
however, her diagnosis did not meet the criteria for PTSD or any 
other unfitting condition that would necessitate a Medical 
Evaluation Board.

The applicant’s discharge board was held on 7 August 2012.  Her 
commander reviewed the record of Board Proceeding and approved 
the Board’s findings.  The administrative discharge package 
clearly indicates the applicant was counseled on numerous 
occasions regarding her conduct and afforded the opportunity to 
meet Air Force standards prior to the initiation of her 
discharge.

The applicant is apparently succeeding and coping well in her 
civilian capacity; however, that does not change the basis for 
which she was separated.  The documentation in her master 
personnel file, 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.  

There is no evidence of an error or injustice in the processing 
of the discharge.  AFPC/DPSOR does concur with the applicant 
being reinstated if cleared medically and recommended for 
reinstatement.

The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPSID recommends the applicant’s records be 
administratively corrected to reflect she was awarded the Air 
Force Good Conduct Medal with three Bronze Oak Leaf Clusters.

The applicant had been receiving the Air Force Good Conduct 
Medal every three years until it was denied on 4 September 2012.  
Due to this denial, it appears that all other previously awarded 
Air Force Good Conduct Medals were deleted from her records.  
The applicant’s records will be administratively corrected.  

The complete DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit D.

AFPC/JA recommends denial of the applicant’s request for 
reinstatement.  The applicant alleges she was improperly 
separated for having an adjustment disorder when her primary 
care manager testified at her administrative discharge board 
hearing that she no longer had the disorder.  On 15 February 
2012, she was diagnosed with having a paranoid personality 
disorder and adjustment disorder.  Her military medical provider 
testified that she had an adjustment disorder.  The applicant 
sought a second opinion from a civilian provider who confirmed 
she had an adjustment disorder.  

AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, paragraph 5.11 
states Airmen may be discharged based upon conditions listed in 
DoDI 1332.38 that interfere with duty performance and are not 
within the purview of the disability evaluation system.  Airmen 
are eligible for referral into the disability evaluation system 
when they have a medical condition set forth in DoDI 1332.38.  
At the time of her diagnosis, this instruction provided that 
persons with adjustment disorders were not considered to have a 
physical disability, and thus not entitled to process through 
the disability evaluation system.  Likewise, personality 
disorder was not considered a physical disability warranting 
processing through the disability evaluation system.  

Due to the applicant’s deployments, additional processing 
requirements were applicable to address PTSD by a Ph.D.-level 
clinical psychologist.  Based on the endorsement from the Air 
Force Surgeon General, all of these processing requirements 
appear to have been met.

When a commander recommends a member for discharge based on 
mental disorder, the recommendation must be supported by 
documents confirming the existence of the condition or disorder.  
There should also be documentation that details the effects of 
the disorder on the member’s performance, conduct, inability to 
adapt to military environment, or other reasons that would limit 
the member’s potential for completing their enlistment.  

The record reflects evidence confirming the existence of 
adjustment disorder which was diagnosed by a clinical 
psychologist and validated by the clinic’s Ph.D. psychologist.  
The same diagnosis was made independently by a civilian 
psychologist.  Additionally, the commander relied on the 
diagnosis of the paranoid personality disorder and adjustment 
disorder when assessing whether her condition affected her 
ability to adapt in a military environment.  The applicant’s 
suicide attempt and her unprofessional display of anger and 
emotions in one instance, as well has her inability to perform 
duties commensurate with her Air Force specialty code and grade 
was used as evidence to show the applicant did not adjust well 
to her assignment.

The evidence in this case was sufficient to establish that the 
requirements of the discharge regulation were met.  The boards 
findings and recommendation and the separation authority’s 
decision were supported by the evidence and were a proper 
exercise of the discretion afforded to them.

The applicant did not establish an error warranting corrective 
action.  She also has not established an injustice as the 
actions in her case were permissible actions taken at the 
discretion of her commander.  

The complete JA evaluation is at Exhibit E.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the 
applicant on 10 July 2013 for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit F).  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 timely filed.

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 are not persuaded by the evidence 
submitted in this appeal that the applicant should be reinstated 
in the Air Force.  Therefore, we agree with the opinion and 
recommendation of the Air Force offices of primary 
responsibility, and adopt their rationale as the basis for our 
conclusion that relief beyond that already administratively 
granted is not warranted.  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 AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2013-00185 in Executive Session on 24 October 2013, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 3 Jan 13, w/atchs. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 1 Mar 13.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPSID, dated 13 May 13.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, AFPC/JA, dated 19 Jun 13.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Jul 13.