RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01581

  			COUNSEL:  NONE

			HEARING DESIRED:  YES


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her narrative reason for separation of “personality disorder” 
and the corresponding separation code of “JFX” be removed from 
her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active 
Duty.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She suffered from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) 
following deployment from Oct 01 to Mar 02; however, her 
condition was not treated as such so when offered early 
separation, she accepted.  

She is now working as a government contractor for the 
Transportation Security Administration (TSA) with the intent of 
becoming a federal employee.  Having “personality disorder” on 
her DD Form 214 may hinder her ability to advance her career and 
obtain a security clearance.  

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 9 Aug 00, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force.

On 15 May 02, her supervisor and a witness documented and 
submitted a Memorandum for Record (MFR) for unprofessional 
behavior because she used vulgar language while attending a 
dental appointment.

On 22 May 02, she received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for 
publicly swearing and insubordination, in violation of Articles 
91 and 117 under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).  
Additionally, one of her co-workers documented and submitted an 
MFR stating the applicant developed laminated index cards with 
profane statements so she could show the person the card instead 
of verbally stating the words. 

On 4 Dec 02, the Commander, Behavioral Science Flight and the 
Chief, Life Skills Element diagnosed her with Axis I: 309.0 
Adjustment disorder with depressed mood per Diagnostic and 
Statistical Manual of Mental Disorder 4th Edition (DSM IV).  In 
their professional opinions, the member had an adjustment 
disorder so severe that her ability to functional within the 
military environment was seriously impaired.  

On 16 Dec 02, her commander submitted a request to have her 
discharged as expeditiously as possible due to the negative 
impact she was having on the unit.      

On 20 Dec 02, she was notified by her squadron commander that he 
was recommending she be discharged for conditions that interfere 
with military service, specifically, mental disorders, pursuant 
to AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, chapter 5, 
section B, paragraph 5.11.9.3.  She acknowledged receipt the 
same day submitting a written statement waiving her right to 
consult an attorney and submit matters on her own behalf.  

On 27 Dec 02, the acting Staff Judge Advocate (SJA), reviewed 
the discharge file and found it legally sufficient.  

On 3 Jan 03, her wing commander approved the discharge action, 
pursuant to AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, 
chapter 5, section B, paragraph 5.11.9.3, at the convenience of 
the government for conditions that interfere with military 
service, specifically mental disorders.

On 6 Jan 03, the applicant received an honorable discharge with 
a narrative reason for separation as “personality disorder” and 
a separation code of “JFX – Service initiated discharge directed 
by established directive when a personality disorder exists, not 
amounting to a disability which significantly impairs the 
member’s ability to function effectively in the military 
environment.”  She was credited with 2 years, 4 months and 28 
days of active service.   


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of 
an error or an injustice.  The applicant’s Reenlistment 
Eligibility (RE) Code of 2C — “Involuntarily separated with an 
honorable discharge; or entry level separation without 
characterization of service” is correct and will not be affected 
if the applicant’s request to change her narrative reason for 
separation and separation code is approved.    

The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial indicating the applicant did not 
provide any evidence of an injustice in the processing of her 
discharge.  The discharge was consistent with the procedural and 
substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  The only 
error found was with the Separation Program Designator (SPD) 
code which is only administrative.  The applicant’s commander 
and discharge authority directed separation for Adjustment 
Disorder.  Since the applicant was discharged for Adjustment 
Disorder, the correct SPD code should reflect “JFY” on the 
applicant’s DD Form 214.  In addition, the narrative reason for 
separation should also reflect “Adjustment Disorder” on the DD 
Form 214.  Recommend items 26 and 28 on the DD Form 214 be 
corrected accordingly.  

The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit D.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the 
applicant on 1 Aug 14 for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit E).  As of this date, no response has been received by 
this office.


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The AFBCMR Clinical Psychology Consultant recommends the Board 
approve changing the applicant’s narrative reason to “Adjustment 
Disorder” with a separation code to accurately reflect the same, 
indicating the she has met the burden of proof that her 
narrative reason for discharge and separation code represents 
errors in her record. 
   
The applicant was discharged for an adjustment disorder, the 
symptoms of which were clearly disruptive to her duty 
performance at that time.  In accordance with the Diagnostic and 
Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, an 
adjustment disorder is diagnosed when an individual’s emotional 
and/or behavioral reaction to a stressor is determined to be out 
of proportion or excessive in the context of the given stressor. 
A personality disorder is stable and marked by a pattern of 
inner experience and behavior that deviates markedly from 
cultural expectations and is pervasive and inflexible with an 
onset in adolescence or early adulthood.  The Consultant opines 
that the clinical psychologist’s use of personality traits in 
the section containing the applicant’s diagnoses is not material 
to the mental health provider’s recommendation for discharge.  
The applicant did not provide medical records contemporaneous 
with her discharge or treatment in the mental health clinic to 
explain why she believes her discharge was related to the 
sequelae of PTSD rather than an adjustment disorder.  Thus, it 
is unclear whether PTSD symptoms may or may not have played a 
role in the disposition of her case.  

The complete AFBCMR Clinical Psychology Consultant evaluation is 
at Exhibit F.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the 
applicant on 18 Jun 15 for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit G).  As of this date, no response has been received by 
this office.


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 warranting 
corrective action.  We note that AFPC/DPSOR states that the 
applicant’s commander and discharge authority directed separation 
for adjustment disorder.  However, the DD form 214 says she was 
discharged for a “personality disorder,” indicating an error in 
the narrative reason.  In our deliberations of this case, we 
concluded the applicant was a productive airman prior to 
deployment and upon returning from deployment began exhibiting 
the symptoms that ultimately led to her discharge.  While the 
AFBCMR Clinical Psychology Consultant recommends changing the 
narrative reason to “adjustment disorder,” the Board believes 
that the words “adjustment disorder” have negative connotations 
similar to “personality disorder.”  The applicant did not request 
this change, and the Board believes it could cause further 
injustice.  As this Board has a duty to ensure no further 
injustice is created based upon its recommendation, we believe 
that correction of her narrative reason for separation to 
“Secretarial Authority” and corresponding SPD code to “JFF” is 
warranted based on the merits of this case.  Accordingly, we 
recommend the applicant’s records be corrected to the extent 
indicated below.

4.  The applicant’s case is adequately documented and it has not 
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel 
will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved.  
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.


THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air 
Force relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show that at the 
time of her 6 January 2003 discharge, her narrative reason for 
separation was “Secretarial Authority” and her Separation 
Program Designator code was “JFF.” 


The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2014-01581 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 7 Apr 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 2 Jun 14.
	Exhibit D.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 3 Jul 14.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 Aug 14.
	Exhibit F.  Memorandum, AFBCMR Clinical Psychology 
Consultant, 11 Jun 15.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Jun 15.