RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-00017
            INDEX NUMBER:  100.07;110.02
XXXXXXXXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  None

      XXX-XX-XXXX      HEARING DESIRED:  No

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Block 28, “Narrative Reason  for  Separation,”  of  his  DD  Form  214,
“Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty” be changed  from
“Personality Disorder” to “Secretarial Authority.”

His records reflect that he had been upgraded to the  five-skill  level
at the time of his separation.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He did not have a “Personality Disorder” but an “Adjustment Disorder.”

He had completed all requirements for upgrade to the  five-skill  level
prior to his  separation  from  service,  but  the  paperwork  was  not
processed in retaliation for his instigating an Inspector General  (IG)
investigation.  The action was designed to deny him his degree from the
Community College of the Air Force (CCAF).

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the regular Air Force on  29  Apr  98  for  a
period of four years.  A resume of the applicant’s EPRs follows:

      Closeout Date               Overall Rating


        15 Oct 99                       5

    15 Oct 00                     5

On 15 Sep 00, the applicant filed a complaint with the Installation  IG
making the following allegations with the indicated findings:

        a.   That his duty section  allowed  “tacking  on”  of  stripes
which caused bodily harm (Substantiated).

        b.  That his duty section  allowed  offensive  and  humiliating
comments to be made (Not substantiated).

On 10 Apr 01, the applicant’s squadron commander notified him  that  he
was recommending  his  discharge  from  the  Air  Force  for  a  mental
disorder.  The applicant acknowledged receipt on 10 Apr 01.  On 13  Apr
01, after consulting counsel, the applicant submitted  a  statement  to
the commander indicating that he did not disagree  with  the  discharge
action.  He explained in his statement why he believed he had developed
the adjustment disorder.  He requested that based on his record  he  be
allowed to serve until the end of Apr 01 in order to meet  requirements
for the GI Bill.  On 17 Apr 01, his squadron commander  recommended  to
the wing commander, the discharge  authority,  that  the  applicant  be
discharged from the Air Force  for  a  mental  disorder  and  given  an
honorable discharge.  The Staff Judge Advocate reviewed  the  discharge
package, found it legally sufficient and recommended that the discharge
authority approve the applicant’s discharge from the Air Force with  an
honorable   service    characterization,    without    probation    and
rehabilitation (P & R).  On 29 Apr 01, the Wing commander approved  the
applicant’s  discharge  with  an  honorable  characterization  and   no
opportunity for P & R.  The applicant was discharged on 2 May 01.

On 13 November 2001, the AFBCMR granted the applicant’s request to void
the EPR closing 14 Feb 01 and remove it from his records.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant  recommends  approval  of  the  applicant’s
request to change the narrative reason  for  applicant’s  discharge  to
“Secretarial Authority.”

When the applicant’s duty  performance  deteriorated  due  to  personal
problems he was dealing with, he was evaluated in mental health where a
diagnosis of Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Anxiety and Depressed  Mood
was established.  Because of the  severe  impact  of  this  on  further
military  service,  administrative  separation  was   recommended   and
accomplished.   This  diagnosis  is  entirely   different   from   that
associated with a diagnosis of personality disorder as found on the  DD
Form 214.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPAE advises that the applicant’s Reenlistment  Eligibility  (RE)
Code of 1R, First-term airmen, selected for reenlistment under the SRP”
is incorrect.  It should read “2C”  “Involuntarily  separated  with  an
honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization
of service.”

The evaluation is at Exhibit D.

AFPC/DPPRS  concurs  with  the  recommendation  of  the  BCMR   Medical
Consultant.  They advise that the applicant’s discharge was  consistent
with the procedural  and  substantive  requirements  of  the  discharge
regulation.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit E.

AFPC/DPPAT recommends disapproval of  the  applicant’s  request  to  be
upgraded to the five-skill level.

On 9 Jan 02, they advised the applicant  by  letter  that  his  request
could not be supported due to his non-compliance with upgrade  training
requirements.  The applicant was decertified on one  of  the  specified
tasks required for upgrade and acknowledged by his signature.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit F.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Complete copies of the Air Force  evaluations  were  forwarded  to  the
applicant on 21 Jun 02 for review and comment within 30 days.  To date,
a response has not been received.

________________________________________________________________

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 regarding the  applicant’s  request
that his records reflect that he had been upgraded  to  the  five-skill
level.  We accept the determination and  recommendation  of  AFPC/DPPAT
that the applicant failed to satisfy  the  necessary  requirements  for
upgrade.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence  to  the  contrary,  we
find no compelling basis to recommend  granting  this  portion  of  the
applicant’s request.

4.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate  the
existence of error or injustice regarding the applicant’s request  that
the narrative reason for his separation be  changed  from  “Personality
Disorder” to “Secretarial Authority.”  We accept the determination  and
recommendation of the BCMR Medical Consultant that the narrative reason
for separation indicated on  the  applicant’s  DD  Form  214  does  not
reflect the actual condition that the applicant was diagnosed with  and
should be changed.

_______________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of  the  Department  of  the  Air  Force
relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 2 May 2001, he  was
separated under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 by reason of “Secretarial
Authority” with a Separation Program Designator (SPD) of “JFF.”

_______________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered Docket Number 02-00017 in
Executive Session on 7 August 2002, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

      Mr. Vaughn E. Schlunz, Panel Chair
      Me. E. David Hoard, Member
      Mr. Clarence D. Long, III, Member

All  members  voted  to  correct  the  records,  as  recommended.   The
following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 26 Dec 02, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Memorandum, BCMR Medical Consultant,
                 Dated 24 Jan 02.
     Exhibit D.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 12 Apr 02.
     Exhibit E.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 26 Apr 02.
     Exhibit F.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPPAT, dated 4 Jun 02.
     Exhibit G.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 21 Jun 02.




                                   VAUGHN E. SCHLUNZ
                                   Panel Chair



AFBCMR 02-00017


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 XXXXXXXXXX, XXX-XX-XXXX, be corrected to show
that on 2 May 2001, he was separated under the provisions of AFI 36-
3208 by reason of “Secretarial Authority” with a Separation Program
Designator (SPD) of “JFF.”






            JOE G. LINEBERGER
            Director
            Air Force Review Boards Agency