RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  00-03005
            INDEX CODE:  100.03, 100.06
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The reenlistment eligibility (RE) code "2C" be changed to "1".

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was not aware that attention  deficit  disorder  (ADD)  was  grounds  for
disqualification in the Air Force, however, he has qualified for service  in
the Navy.

In support of  his  request  applicant  provided  copies  of  correspondence
between his father and his Congressman on his behalf and his  mental  health
evaluation sheet.  Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The relevant facts  pertaining  to  this  application,  extracted  from  the
applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter  prepared  by  the
appropriate office of the Air Force.   Accordingly,  there  is  no  need  to
recite these facts in this Record of Proceedings.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant  reviewed  applicant's  request  and  recommends
denial.  The applicant spent a total of 3 weeks in basic  military  training
(BMT) before being separated with an uncharacterized entry-level  separation
on 8 Nov 1998 for fraudulent entry.  Applicant answered in the  negative  to
questions about past history of any mental illness  or  use  of  medication,
according to him, on advice of his recruiter.  Upon application for  special
forces he admitted to  a  history  of  childhood  abuse  and  a  history  of
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and treatment with  Ritalin,
his last dose taken 6 months prior to arrival at BMT.  He gave a history  of
ingestion of a bottle of aspirin to avoid going to school, and a history  of
inpatient mental ward  hospitalization  and  treatment  with  anti-psychotic
mediations.  His past  mental  health  history  gleaned  in  the  course  of
evaluation at Lackland AFB was ample to disqualify applicant  from  military
service.  Air Force Instruction  is  specific  in  detailing  mental  health
problems acknowledged by the applicant for which  enlistment  is  prohibited
(see Exhibit C).

AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed applicant's request and concurs with the  BCMR  Medical
Consultant and recommends denial.  DPPRS states that applicant  provided  no
evidence to dispute the his past mental history that  was  ample  reason  to
disqualify him for military service (see Exhibit D).

The Special Programs and AFBCMR Manager, AFPC/DPPAES,  reviewed  applicant's
request and states that applicant's RE code is correct (see Exhibit E).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant responded and states that upon  entering  BMT  he  was  under  the
impression from his recruiter that ADD was not disqualifying or  even  asked
about.  He was asked, with his recruiter on the phone, if  he  told  him  to
lie.  Wanting to avoid confrontation, he took the blame.  The therapies  and
prescriptions he took  were  not  decisions  made  by  himself  but  by  his
parents, who at the time were under  the  impression  that  those  decisions
would not affect him as an adult since they occurred when he  was  a  minor.
The fact that his mother had an affair when his father was away on  business
with an individual that abused him right before his parents separated had  a
vast impact on his childhood.  He was not accepted by anybody, not even  his
mother who disappeared for 13 years.  He did take  aspirin  to  get  out  of
going to school because he found no  support  from  the  school.   The  vice
principal thought he was a pain  and  that  his  problems  did  not  warrant
professional action.

When he was 17, he went into a  discipleship  program.   He  learned  a  lot
about responsibility and gained self-esteem and courage for the  first  time
in his life, only to have his dreams  crushed  by  the  Air  Force.   He  is
strong in the mind and in heart and feels that he  would  be  invaluable  in
the service of the armed forces and is fully prepared for any challenge.

In further support of his request, applicant had provided a letter from  his
father and several character reference statements.  His complete  submission
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 timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence  of  probable  error  or  injustice.   We  took  notice   of   the
applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case;  however,
we agree with the opinion and recommendation of  the  Air  Force  office  of
primary responsibility that under the given  circumstances  the  applicant's
RE code is appropriate.  Accordingly, we adopt their rationale as the  basis
for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim  of  an  error
or injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence  to  the  contrary,  we
find no compelling basis to recommend granting the  relief  sought  in  this
application.

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 issue  involved.   Therefore,  the  request  for  a
hearing is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

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 20 Mar 01, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
      Mr. Roscoe Hinton, Jr., Member
      Mr. Thomas J. Topolski, Jr., Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 25 Oct 00, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 7 Dec 00.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 17 Jan 01.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAES, dated 19 Jan 01.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 2 Feb 01.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, Applicant, dated 28 Feb 01, w/atchs.




                                   RICHARD A. PETERSON
                                   Panel Chair