RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2002-03749
            INDEX CODE:  110.02

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  YES


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His narrative reason  for  separation  of  "Personality  Disorder"  be
changed to "Hardship."

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

While he was  in  technical  training  school,  his  wife  suffered  a
hardship (mental condition) that required his immediate presence.   As
a result, he was separated with an entry  level  separation,  and  the
reason was mistakenly taken  for  his  wife's  situation.   Since  the
reason for his separation is wrong, it should be changed.  Because  he
is very enthusiastic about returning to the Air Force, he also desires
to have his RE code changed.

In support of his appeal,  the  applicant  provided  several  personal
statements, a statement from his wife,  congressional  correspondence,
and extracts from his military personnel records.

Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 28  May  02  for  a
period of six years in the grade of airman.

On 21 Aug 02, the applicant’s  commander  notified  him  that  he  was
recommending that the applicant be discharged for a  mental  disorder.
The reason for the action was that, on 5 Aug  02,  the  applicant  was
diagnosed by a psychiatrist as  having  an  adjustment  disorder  with
depressed mood, as described in the Diagnostic and Statistical  Manual
of Medical Disorders (DSM-IV), which was so severe that his ability to
function effectively in the  military  environment  was  significantly
impaired.   The  applicant’s  disorder  was  evidenced  by  his   poor
appetite, insomnia, low energy, and poor concentration.  The applicant
was advised of his rights  in  the  matter  and  that  an  entry-level
separation would be recommended.

On 22 Aug 02, the  Office  of  the  Staff  Judge  Advocate  found  the
discharge case file to be legally sufficient and  concurred  with  the
commander’s recommendation that the  applicant  should  be  discharged
based on his mental disorder.

On 26 Aug 02, the discharge authority approved the separation  of  the
applicant and directed that he be furnished an entry level separation.

On 27 Aug 02, the applicant was separated under the provisions of  AFI
36-3208 (Personality Disorder) with an entry level separation.  He was
credited with three (3) months of active service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Medical Consultant noted that the applicant was diagnosed with  an
adjustment  disorder,  an  unsuiting  condition  that  may   but   not
necessarily  always  result  in  an  administrative  discharge.    The
severity of the symptoms, the degree  to  which  they  interfere  with
service, the likelihood of persistence  or  worsening  if  the  member
remains in the service, and of the risk for recurrence are  considered
in recommendations for discharge.  The  Medical  Consultant  indicated
that in this case, it appears that the symptoms were  mild,  that  the
applicant  demonstrated  outstanding   duty   performance,   and   his
commanders  acted  compassionately   to   assist   him   resolve   his
unanticipated family crisis.  He concluded that the  applicant’s  risk
for recurrence of disabling symptoms was low since  there  was  little
evidence that his  symptoms  rendered  him  unable  to  satisfactorily
perform  his  duties,  and  the  circumstances  were  reversible   and
preventable.

The Medical Consultant stated that although the action and disposition
in this case were proper and equitable reflecting compliance with  Air
Force directives that implement the law, the  evidence  of  this  case
support change of the narrative reason for  discharge  to  Secretarial
Authority and change of the RE code that would allow reenlistment.

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

AFPC/DPPRS indicated that based on the documentation in the file, they
believe  the  discharge  was  consistent  with  the   procedural   and
substantive requirements of the discharge regulation, and  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 the Defense (DoD)  determined  that  if  a
member served less than 180 days  of  continuous  active  service,  it
would be unfair to the member and the service  to  characterize  their
limited service.

AFPC/DPPRS stated that they concur with  the  Medical  Consultant  and
recommended that the applicant's narrative reason  for  separation  be
changed to "Secretarial Authority" and his separation code to "KFF."

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

AFPC/DPPAE  indicated   that   the   applicant's   RE   code   of   2C
("Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry  level
separation without characterization of service," is correct.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to applicant on  18
Apr 03 for review and response.  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 regarding the applicant’s requests
that his narrative reason for separation of "Personality Disorder"  be
changed to "Hardship."  The  evidence  of  record  reflects  that  the
applicant was diagnosed with an  adjustment  disorder  with  depressed
mood.  A determination was made that the disorder was so  severe  that
his ability to function effectively in the  military  environment  was
significantly impaired.  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 because  it
is wrong.  However, notwithstanding  the  applicant's  contention,  as
well as the recommendations by the Medical Consultant  and  AFPC/DPPRS
that the reason for separation be changed because of what is  believed
to be an administrative shortfall in the separation coding of cases of
this type,  a  majority  of  the  Board  is  not  persuaded  that  the
applicant's narrative reason for separation was improper  or  contrary
to the governing directives under which it was effected.  In  view  of
their 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,  a  majority  of  the
Board finds no compelling basis to favorably consider the  applicant's
request.

4.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented  to  demonstrate
the existence of error or injustice concerning the applicant’s request
that his RE code of  "2C"  be  changed  to  "1."   We  note  that  the
Secretary of the Air Force has statutory authority to promulgate rules
and regulations governing the administration of the Air Force.  In the
exercise of that authority, the Secretary has determined that  members
separated from the Air Force would be furnished an RE code  predicated
upon  the  quality  of  their  service  and  circumstances  of   their
separation.  The evidence of record reflects that  the  applicant  was
involuntarily  separated  for  a  personality  disorder  after   being
diagnosed with an adjustment disorder.  As a result, he was  given  an
entry level separation and assigned an RE code of "2C"  (involuntarily
separated with an  honorable  discharge;  or  entry  level  separation
without characterization of service).  Therefore, it appears that  the
applicant’s  RE  code  was  appropriately  assigned   and   accurately
reflected the  circumstances  of  his  separation,  and,  we  find  no
evidence to indicate the assigned RE code was in error.   In  view  of
the foregoing, and in the absence of  evidence  to  the  contrary,  we
conclude that no basis exists to recommend  favorable  action  on  the
applicant’s request.

_________________________________________________________________

RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD:

A majority of the  panel  finds  insufficient  evidence  of  error  or
injustice regarding the applicant’s requests that his narrative reason
for separation of "Personality Disorder" be changed to "Hardship"  and
recommends the request be denied.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of material error  or  injustice  concerning
the applicant’s request that his RE code of "2C" be  changed  to  "1";
that the request was denied without a personal  appearance;  and  that
the request will only be reconsidered upon  the  submission  of  newly
discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2002-03749 in Executive Session on 10 Jun 03, under the provisions  of
AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
      Mr. Christopher Carey, Member
      Mr. Gregory A. Parker, Member

By a majority vote, the Board voted to deny  the  applicant’s  request
that his narrative reason for separation of "Personality Disorder"  be
changed to "Hardship."  Mr. Carey voted to grant the request  but  did
not desire to submit a minority report.  The Board  unanimously  voted
to deny the applicant’s request that his RE code of "2C" be changed to
"1."  The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 29 Sep 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, Medical Consultant, dated 13 Feb 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 4 Mar 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 15 Apr 03.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Apr 03.




                                   RICHARD A. PETERSON
                                   Panel Chair



AFBCMR BC-2002-03749






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

SUBJECT:  AFBCMR Application of

      I have carefully reviewed the evidence of record and the
recommendation of the Board members.  A majority found that applicant
had not provided sufficient evidence of error or injustice regarding
his request that his narrative reason for separation of "Personality
Disorder" be changed to "Hardship" and recommended the request be
denied.  I concur with that finding and their conclusion that relief
is not warranted.  Accordingly, I accept their recommendation that
this portion of the application be denied.

      Please advise the applicant accordingly.





                                           JOE G. LINEBERGER
                                           Director
                                           Air Force Review Boards
Agency




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

SUBJECT:    AFBCMR Case of , AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2002-03749

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

      Although the evidence of record indicates that the applicant was
separated from the Air Force because of a personality disorder, the actual
diagnosis was an adjustment disorder.  The majority 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 that the evidence in this
case supports a change of the narrative reason for separation.  The Medical
Consultant noted that although the applicant's diagnosis of an adjustment
disorder was an unsuiting condition, in the applicant's case, it appears
that the symptoms were mild.  He also noted that the applicant demonstrated
outstanding duty performance, and his risk for recurrence of disabling
symptoms was low.  In addition to the aforementioned factors, I believe 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.

                                       JOE G. LINEBERGER
                                       Director
                                       Air Force Review Boards Agency




AFBCMR BC-2002-03749





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 27 Aug 02, 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