RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2002-03361
            INDEX CODE:  100.02, 110.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: YES

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility  (RE)  code  2C  and  his  reason  for
separation (Personality Disorder) be changed.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The narrative reason for  separation  of  personality  disorder  is
false.  He states that although he knew that he had  a  reason  for
separation of personality disorder, he was unaware of  what  to  do
about it.

In support of his appeal, applicant submitted a personal statement;
a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from
Active  Duty;  two  letters  of  character  reference  from  former
supervisors; a copy of a certificate of recognition; a  copy  of  a
letter of appreciation from a former commander  and  a  copy  of  a
training completion letter, dated 6 Aug 1999.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 3 February 1999, applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force for
a period of 6 years in the grade of airman basic (E-1/AB).  He  was
progressively promoted to the grade of airman first class (E-3/A1C)
with an effective date and date of rank (DOR) of 10 Jun  1999.   He
received a letter of evaluation for  the  period  of  25  Jun  1999
through 2 Aug 2000, indicating that he performed his  duties  in  a
satisfactory manner, but required strong guidance.

Applicant was evaluated on 25 July  2000,  by  the  --  MDOS/SGOMH,
F.E. Warren  Medical  Center  Inpatient  Mental  Health   Unit   at
F.E. Warren AFB, WY.  They diagnosed the  applicant  as  having  an
Adjustment Disorder  with  Depressed  Mood,  as  described  in  the
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual  of  Mental  Disorders  (DSM-IV).
The prognosis rendered reflects that he did not  have  a  medically
disqualifying condition and that  he  was  competent  for  pay  and
records and responsible for his behavior.  However, he did  present
symptoms of depression, secondary to his  difficulty  adjusting  to
life in the Air Force.  He had been  permanently  decertified  from
the Personnel Reliability Program (PRP) and was no longer  able  to
perform the military duties for which he had been trained.  It  was
very unlikely that his symptoms would improve while he remained  in
the USAF and cross-training was strongly ill-advised and was not in
the best  interest  of  the  Air  Force  or  the  individual.   His
Adjustment Disorder with Depressed Mood was of such  severity  that
his  ability  to  function  in   the   military   effectively   was
significantly  impaired  and  his  prognosis  for  ever   adjusting
successfully to life in the Air Force was very poor.

On  11  Aug  2000,  the  squadron   section   commander   initiated
administrative discharge action against the applicant for a  mental
disorder.  The specific reason for  the  proposed  action  was  the
diagnosis cited  above.   It  was  determined  that  this  disorder
significantly impaired his ability to function effectively  in  the
military.  The applicant was advised of his right to counsel and to
submit statements on his own behalf.  On 16 Aug 2000, he waived his
right to consult counsel and did not submit a statement on his  own
behalf.  On 29 Aug 2000, the discharge authority directed applicant
be  discharged  and  concurred  with  the  recommendation  for   an
honorable discharge.

On 15 Sep 2000, the applicant was honorably  discharged  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-3208, by reason of personality  disorder,  and
was issued an RE  code  of  2C  (involuntarily  separated  with  an
honorable   discharge;   or    entry-level    separation    without
characterization of service).  He served  1  year,  7  months,  and
15 days on active duty.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The  AFBCMR  Medical  Consultant  states  that  the  applicant  was
discharged on 15 Sep 2000, after 1 year, 7 months, and 15  days  on
active duty and now requests that his records be changed to show  a
different reason for discharge that would permit him  to  reenlist.
He indicated that the applicant  was  evaluated  by  mental  health
beginning on 13 Mar 2000 for  refusal  to  perform  his  duties  in
guarding nuclear missiles and  associated  distress  regarding  his
duties (“stressed and unwilling to do PRP job”).  As  a  result  of
his difficulties, he was suspended from his PRP duties and assigned
administrative  duties  pending  evaluation.   He   was   initially
diagnosed with occupational problems, but on follow-up 27 Mar 2000,
he was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder with  Mixed  Anxiety  and
Depressed  Mood.   Follow-up  mental   health   evaluation   dated,
25 Jul 2000,  reported  continued  symptoms   of   depressed   mood
secondary to his difficulty adjusting to life  in  the  Air  Force.
His  diagnosis  remained  unchanged,   Adjustment   Disorder   with
Depressed Mood that was unsuiting for continued service and he  was
recommended for administrative separation.

On the applicant’s DD Form 214, the narrative reason for  discharge
is listed as personality disorder even though the applicant was not
diagnosed with a personality disorder  or  maladaptive  personality
trait.  The Department of Defense (DOD) uses the term  “personality
disorder” administratively on  the  DD  Form  214  to  include  all
unsuiting character and  behavior  disorders  including  Adjustment
Disorder, Personality Disorders, and  Impulse  Controls  Disorders.
This  term  is  confusing  because  the  DSM-IV   uses   the   term
“personality disorder” in a specific, defined  manner  to  classify
specific disorders of personality that do  not  include  Adjustment
Disorder or Impulse Control Disorder.  Prior  regulation  used  the
more  inclusive  and  less  confusing   “character   and   behavior
disorder.”  Although the action and disposition in  this  case  are
proper  and  equitable  reflecting  compliance   with   Air   Force
directives that implement the  law,  it  is  recommended  that  the
narrative reason for discharge be changed to Secretarial Authority,
but no change to the reenlistment eligibility code is warranted.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

HQ  AFPC/DPPRS  reviewed  this  application  and  found  that   the
discharge  was  consistent  with  the  procedural  and  substantive
requirements of the discharge regulation.  Additionally,  that  the
discharge  was  within  the  sound  discretion  of  the   discharge
authority.  They further agreed with the AFBCMR Medical  Consultant
and recommended  the  separation  code  and  narrative  reason  for
separation (DD Form 214, Blocks 26 and 28) be changed to “KFF”  and
“Secretarial Authority.”

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D.

HQ AFPC/DPPAE reviewed this application and found that the RE  code
2C, “Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry-
level separation without characterization of service,” is correct.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit E.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant
on 25 Apr 2003 for review and comment within 30 days.  As  of  this
date, no response has been received by this office (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  error  or  injustice  in  regard  to
applicant’s request for a change in his RE code.   At  the  time  a
member is separated from the Air Force, they are  furnished  an  RE
Code  predicated  upon  the  quality  of  their  service  and   the
circumstances of their separation.  The assigned code reflects  the
Air Force’s position  regarding  whether  or  not,  or  under  what
circumstances, the individual should be allowed to reenlist.  After
careful  consideration  of  the  evidence  provided,  we  are   not
persuaded that the assigned RE code is in error or unjust  or  that
an upgrade of the RE code is warranted.  We therefore conclude that
no basis exists upon which to recommend  favorable  action  on  his
request that it be changed.

4.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to  demonstrate
the existence of error or injustice warranting a correction of  the
applicant’s narrative reason for separation.  After  reviewing  his
submission and the evidence of record, we are persuaded  that  some
relief is warranted.  We note there is  no  provision  for  listing
adjustment disorder in  the  narrative  reason  for  administrative
separation.  Personality disorder is used for all unsuiting  mental
health disorders, even in cases such as the  applicant’s  when  the
diagnosis  was  adjustment  disorder,  not  personality   disorder.
Although action and disposition of the applicant’s case appears  to
be in compliance with Air Force directives; it appears to  us  that
the  current  reason  could  be  misconstrued  to  infer  that  his
separation was due to actual “personality disorder”  instead  of  a
maladjustment to military service.  Therefore, in order to  correct
an injustice of improperly labeling the  applicant,  his  narrative
reason for separation should be corrected to accurately reflect the
circumstances of his separation.  We agree with the AFBCMR  Medical
Consultant  that  the  narrative  reason  should  be   changed   to
“Secretarial  Authority”   and   therefore   recommend   that   the
applicant’s records be corrected to the extent indicated below.

5.  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 APPLICANT, be corrected  to  show  that  the  narrative
reason for separation, issued in  conjunction  with  his  honorable
discharge on 15 September 2000, was “Secretarial Authority” and the
separation program designator (SPD) code was “JFF.”

___________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket  Number
BC-2002-03361 in Executive  Session  on  4  June  2003,  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Marcia J. Bachman, Member
                 Ms. Marilyn Thomas, Member

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

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 Oct 02, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 12 Feb 03.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 4 Mar 03.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAE, dated 15 Apr 03.
     Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Apr 03.




                                   CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
                                   Panel Chair



AFBCMR BC-2002-03361




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 APPLICANT be corrected to show that the narrative
reason for separation, issued in conjunction with his honorable
discharge on 15 September 2000, was “Secretarial Authority” and the
separation program designator (SPD) code was “JFF.”







            JOE G. LINEBERGER
            Director
            Air Force Review Boards Agency