RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  98-02144
            INDEX CODE:  110.02

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The narrative reason for his separation be changed  from  “Personality
Disorder” to “Inability to Adjust.”

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Changing the narrative reason for separation to “Inability to  Adjust”
would provide a more accurate description of the  difficulty  that  he
encountered while serving in the Air Force.  Under the current reason,
he believes that he is at risk  of  false  conclusions  regarding  his
mental health or stability.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provided a copy of  a  DD Form
293, Application for the Review of Discharge  or  Dismissal  from  the
Armed Forces of the United States (Exhibit A).

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 25  Feb  98  for  a
period of 4 years.

On 15 May 98, the applicant’s  commander  notified  him  that  he  was
recommending that the applicant  be  discharged  for  conditions  that
interfere with military service, mental disorders.  The reason for the
action was that, on 6 May 98,  the  applicant  was  evaluated  by  the
Inpatient Psychiatry Service who diagnosed him as having an adjustment
disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood.  They determined  that
this  disorder  significantly  impaired  the  applicant’s  ability  to
function in the  military  and  recommended  separation  in  the  best
interest of the Air Force.  The applicant was advised of his rights in
the matter and that an entry level separation  would  be  recommended.
The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification and waived  his
right to consult military counsel and submit  statements  in  his  own
behalf.

On 18 May 98, the  Office  of  the  Staff  Judge  Advocate  found  the
discharge case file to be legally sufficient and recommended that  the
discharge authority direct that the applicant be  separated  from  the
service with an entry level separation.

On 19 May 98, the discharge authority approved  the  discharge  action
and  directed  that  the  applicant  be  furnished  an   entry   level
separation.

On 4 Jun 98, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of  AFI
36-3208 (Personality Disorder) with an entry level separation.  He was
assigned an RE code of 2C and a separation code of JFX.  He had served
3 months and 10 days.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant reviewed this application and noted  that,
after being evaluated,  the  applicant  was  diagnosed  as  having  an
“Adjustment Disorder with Mixed  Anxiety  and  Depressed  Mood.”   The
evaluation was  accomplished  based  on  the  applicant’s  commander’s
request after noting the applicant’s depression, anxiety, and lack  of
motivation.  According to the  Medical  Consultant,  the  current  Air
Force instruction regulating separations for  mental  health  problems
does not allow flexibility for  coding  for  other  than  “Personality
Disorder,” an entirely different code sequence than  that  with  which
the applicant was diagnosed.  It is not proper to apply  an  erroneous
label to an individual simply because of a  recognized  administrative
shortfall as occurred in this case.  The Medical Consultant is of  the
opinion that, in order to correct an injustice of improperly  labeling
the applicant’s disorder, the applicant’s request for change of reason
for his discharge should be changed to read  “Secretarial  Authority,”
with  a  corresponding  separation  code  of  “KFF.”    However,   the
reenlistment eligibility  (RE)  code  should  not  be  changed  as  it
reflects an involuntary entry level separation.

A complete copy of the Medical Consultant’s evaluation is  at  Exhibit
C.

The Separations Branch,  AFPC/DPPRS,  reviewed  this  application  and
indicated  that  they  concurred   with   the   Medical   Consultant’s
recommendation that his narrative  reason  for  separation  should  be
changed to “Secretarial Authority” with a separation  code  of  “KFF.”
They also concurred with the recommendation that there  should  be  no
changed in the RE code.

A complete copy of the DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to  applicant  on  28
Dec 98 for review and response.  As of this date, no response has been
received by this office (Exhibit E).

_________________________________________________________________

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 probable error or injustice.  The evidence of  record
reflects that the applicant was  diagnosed  as  having  an  adjustment
disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed.  A determination  was  made
that the disorder significantly impaired the  applicant’s  ability  to
function in the military.  As a result, he was subsequently  separated
from the Air Force by reason of a personality disorder.  The applicant
now requests that the reason for his separation be changed to one that
more  accurately  describes  the  difficulty  he  encountered  in  the
service.  However, notwithstanding the recommendation by  the  Medical
Consultant that the reason for separation be changed because  of  what
he believes is an administrative shortfall in the separation coding of
cases of  this  type,  we  are  not  persuaded  that  the  applicant's
narrative reason was improper or contrary to the governing  regulation
under which it was effected.  In view of our opinion  in  this  matter
and in the absence of evidence that the applicant's substantial rights
were violated, that the information contained in  the  discharge  case
file was erroneous, or that his superiors abused  their  discretionary
authority, we find no compelling  basis  to  favorably  consider  this
application.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of probable  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  this  application  in
Executive Session on 1 Jun 99, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
      Mr. Patrick R. Wheeler, Member
      Mr. Grover L. Dunn, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 12 Aug 98, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 28 Oct 98.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 10 Dec 98.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 28 Dec 98.




                                   RICHARD A. PETERSON
                                   Panel Chair

                   MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD
                   FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

FROM: Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Manpower, Reserve Affairs,
       Installations & Environment)

SUBJECT:    AFBCMR Case of , , AFBCMR Docket Number 98-02144

      I have carefully reviewed all the circumstances of this case and do
not agree with the Board panel that insufficient relevant evidence has been
presented warranting favorable action on the applicant’s request that his
narrative reason for separation be changed.

      The evidence of record indicates that the applicant was separated from
the Air Force because of a personality disorder when the actual diagnosis
was an adjustment disorder.  The Board found no evidence that the
applicant’s narrative reason for separation was improper or contrary to the
governing regulation under which it was effected.  However, I agree with
the BCMR Medical Consultant’s assessment concerning this case.  That is, it
would be an injustice to apply the label of a personality disorder to an
individual to whom it does not apply because the current Air Force
instruction does not allow for any other code to be assigned.

      In view of the above, it is my decision that the applicant’s narrative
reason for discharge be changed to “Secretarial Authority.”  Such action
will afford him proper and fitting relief.











      AFBCMR 98-02144

      MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

            Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air
Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of
Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed
that:

            The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air
Force relating to , , be corrected to show that, on 4 Jun 98, he was
discharged under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Secretarial Authority),
with a separation code of KFF.


    JOE G. LINEBERGER


    Director


    Air Force Review Boards Agency