RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-00182
            INDEX CODE:  112.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She had never spent more than a week away from her family and to  have
to stay away through the holidays was making her  miss  them  way  too
much and she thought she wanted to go home.  One night she  asked  the
Training Instructor if he knew how she could leave.  He told her to go
to Behavioral Analysis Services and tell  a  counselor  that  she  was
depressed/suicidal.  She seized the opportunity and elaborated maybe a
little too much.  She wanted to make sure that she would go home.   It
worked but she was a little too young to realize the mistake  she  had
just made.  Every day  since  she  has  been  out  she  has  regretted
leaving.  She wish she could undo the mistake she made.

Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 3 November 1999.

On 16 November 1999, the commander notified the applicant that she was
being  discharged  for  a  condition  that  interfered  with  military
service,  specifically  for  mental  disorders.   The  applicant   was
diagnosed as  having  a  mental  disorder.   It  was  determined  this
condition interfered with her duty performance  and  conduct  and  was
severe enough that  her  ability  to  function  in  the  military  was
significantly impaired.

The applicant, while  serving  in  the  grade  of  airman  basic,  was
separated from the Air Force on 19 November 1999 under the  provisions
of AFI  36-3208,  Administrative  Separation  of  Airmen  (personality
disorder), with an uncharacterized entry-level  separation.   She  was
assigned a reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2C.   She  served  17
days total active service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant states that  the  records  document  entry
level separation for unsuiting  maladjustment  to  military  training.
The applicant was  not  adjusting  well  to  military  life  in  basic
training, was having second  thoughts  about  her  apparent  impulsive
decision to enlist, and was experiencing  emotional  stress  from  the
recent separation of her parents and separation from her family.   She
did not develop signs or symptoms of a clear  adjustment  disorder  or
depression but was felt to  be  high  risk  for  this.   She  was  not
diagnosed with a personality disorder however a sufficient  period  of
time had not elapsed to definitively make such a diagnosis.   A  prior
pattern of maladjustment was noted.  Action and  disposition  in  this
case were proper and equitable reflecting compliance  with  Air  Force
directives which implement the law.

The  applicant  applies  now  for  change  in  her  reenlistment  code
contending her entry-level separation was the result of immaturity  at
that time has now  resolved.   She  submits  a  psychiatry  evaluation
judging her normal and not finding evidence to support  a  pattern  of
maladjustment  in  her  civilian  life,   personality   disorder,   or
psychiatric illness.

The preponderance of the evidence supports the applicant’s  contention
that the timing of her initial enlistment was a mistake, and that  her
failure to succeed in basic training seemed to be largely  the  result
of immaturity and lack of commitment rather than a lifelong pattern of
maladjustment  or  personality  disorder.   Other  than   her   stated
commitment, and the psychiatry evaluation, her post  service  civilian
life does not provide overwhelming insight into how she may perform in
a military environment and thus some concern remains.  Therefore,  the
BCMR Medical  Consultant  is  of  the  opinion  that  her  history  of
difficulty adjusting to military  service  during  basic  training  in
November 1999 should  not  preclude  favorable  consideration  of  her
request at this time but notes  that  future  success  in  a  military
environment is not a guarantee.

A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPRSP states that they believe the discharge was consistent with
the  procedural  and  substantive  requirements   of   the   discharge
regulation.   Additionally,  the  discharge  was  within   the   sound
discretion of the discharge authority.  Airmen are  given  entry-level
separation/uncharacterized service characterization when separation is
initiated in the first 180 days of  continuous  active  service.   The
Department of Defense (DOD) determined if a member  served  less  than
180 days continuous active service, it would be unfair to  the  member
and the service to characterize  their  limited  service.   Therefore,
they recommend denial of applicant’s request.

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

AFPC/DPPAE states that the Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code  of  2C,
“Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge, or  entry  level
separation without characterization of service” is correct.

A complete copy of their evaluation is attached at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 9 August 2002, a complete copy of  the  Air  Force  evaluation  was
forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days.  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 timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented  to  demonstrate
the existence of probable error or  injustice.   After  reviewing  the
evidence of record, we are not persuaded that the applicant’s RE  code
should be  changed.   The  comments  provided  by  the  Chief  Medical
Consultant are noted; however, we do not believe  that  the  applicant
has established that she has overcome the problems she incurred  while
in the military.  Based on the applicant’s prior failure to adjust  to
military life and in the absence of more detailed evaluations, we find
no basis upon which to recommend favorable action on 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  this  application  in
Executive Session on 24 September 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:

                       Ms. Peggy E. Gordon, Panel Chair
                       Mr. Albert J. Starnes, Member
                       Mr. John B. Hennessey, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 1 Apr 02, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 7 May 02.
      Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPRSP, dated 24 May 02.
      Exhibit E. Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 6 Aug 02.
      Exhibit F. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 9 Aug 02.




                             PEGGY E. GORDON
                             Panel Chair