RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-00149
            INDEX NUMBER:  110.00
      XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL:  None

      XXX-XX-XXXX      HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her Reenlistment Eligibility Code be changed from “2C,” “Involuntarily
separated with an  honorable  discharge;  or  entry  level  separation
without characterization of service, to one in the “1”  series,  which
will allow her to reenter the Air Force.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

While  in  the  Air  Force,  she  was  misdiagnosed   and   discharged
inappropriately.  She has since been to a psychologist  that  reviewed
her discharge and has had sessions with her to  help  prove  that  her
discharge was inequitable.

In support of her appeal, applicant provides a statement detailing the
circumstances that led to her discharge.  She discusses her depression
at the time and her  recovery.   She  states  that  she  is  now  more
emotionally stable and mature and indicates that if the same situation
were to arise in the future, she would take advantage of the resources
made available to her.  The applicant also  provides  a  statement  of
psychological  evaluation  from  a  licensed  psychologist  that   she
retained to determine whether she had any  mental  health  issue  that
would preclude her from serving in  the  military.   The  psychologist
determined that there is no evidence of an Axis I or  Axis  II  Mental
Disorder at the present time and there is no  reason,  from  a  mental
health standpoint,  to  prevent  the  applicant  from  reentering  the
military.

The applicant has also attached a  copy  of  the  discharge  paperwork
prepared in her case.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant entered active duty on 24 Jan 01 in the grade of  airman
basic.  On 7 May 01, her squadron section commander notified her  that
she was recommending her discharge from the Air  Force  for  a  mental
disorder.  The reason for the commander’s action was that on or  about
23 Apr 01, the applicant was diagnosed by a psychologist as having  an
adjustment disorder with depressed mood and personality disorder,  not
otherwise  specified  (NOS),  as  described  in  the  Diagnostic   and
Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV), which was  so  severe
that her ability to function effectively in the  military  environment
was significantly impaired.  The applicant acknowledged receipt of the
commander’s notification on 7 May 01.  She elected to waive her  right
to consult counsel and to submit statements in her behalf.  On  7  May
01, the applicant’s squadron  section  commander  recommended  to  the
training group commander that the  applicant  be  discharged  with  an
entry-level separation.  On  11  May  01,  the  staff  judge  advocate
reviewed the discharge package and  found  it  legally  sufficient  to
support   the   applicant’s   discharge   and   concurred   with   the
recommendation for an entry-level  separation.   On  15  May  01,  the
training group commander directed that  the  applicant  be  discharged
with an entry-level separation.  The applicant was  discharged  on  16
May 01 with an entry-level separation for personality  disorder.   She
received a “2C” RE code.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical  Consultant  recommends  denial  of  the  applicant’s
request.   The  applicant  began  to  experience   difficulties   with
emotional distress and inability to adapt  to  the  military  training
environment  after  two  months  and  expressed  her  desire  to  stop
reporting for  class  and  to  get  out  of  the  military.   Thorough
evaluation while  she  was  symptomatic  by  mental  health  personnel
disclosed diagnoses of Adjustment Disorder  with  depressed  mood  and
Personality Disorder NOS.  Adjustment Disorder when severe  enough  is
unsuiting for continued military service and cause for  administrative
discharge.  One of the key features of Adjustment Disorder is that the
condition resolves with relief of the stressors.  This is  why  it  is
not surprising, nor contradictory that  the  applicant,  currently  no
longer working in the military environment, no longer has a  diagnosis
of Adjustment Disorder.

Personality Disorders are lifelong patterns of  maladjustment  in  the
individual’s  personality   structure,   which   are   not   medically
disqualifying or unfitting but may render  the  individual  unsuitable
for further military service  and  may  be  cause  for  administrative
action by the individual’s unit commander.  Personality Disorders  are
frequently  exacerbated  by  stress  and  may  present  with  symptoms
consistent with Adjustment Disorder.  The applicant  underwent  repeat
psychological evaluation at a time when she was  asymptomatic  and  no
longer under the stress of the military training environment resulting
in a conclusion  that  she  does  not  have  a  personality  disorder.
Although  a  single  psychological  interview  may  be  sufficient  to
establish  a  diagnosis,  often  multiple  interviews  over  time   or
supplementary information from other informants  (Spouses,  employers,
etc.) and formal psychological testing (typically includes  the  MMPI-
II) may be necessary to recognize the patterns that typify Personality
Disorder.  The Air Force psychologists had the advantage of evaluating
the applicant at a time of stress with supplementary information  from
supervisors and her husband.  At the  time  of  that  evaluation,  the
applicant was motivated to get out of the  Air  Force.   The  civilian
psychologist does not mention any sources of supplementary information
and the applicant is motivated to  reenlist.   Further,  the  civilian
psychologist lists numerous tests that were administered but makes  no
mention of the MMPI-II, the standard test for evaluating  personality.
The tests that  were  administered  are  informative  with  regard  to
current symptoms.  It is likely that  the  applicant  has  personality
traits that interfere with her ability to  function  in  the  military
environment.  Whether or not the applicant has a Personality  Disorder
is disputed but not resolved by the post discharge evaluation.

Regardless, the applicant demonstrated that she was not  suitable  for
military service  due  to  Adjustment  Disorder  and  has  at  minimum
maladaptive personality traits further rendering her unsuitable.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPRS  recommends  denial  of  the  applicant’s   request.    The
applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify  any  errors  or
injustices that occurred in the discharge process.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit D.

AFPC/DPPAE reviewed the applicant’s case file and determined that  her
RE code of “2C” is correct.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on
19 Jun 03 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.   We  took  notice  of   the
applicant's complete submission in judging the  merits  of  the  case;
however, we agree with the opinions and  recommendations  of  the  Air
Force offices of primary responsibility and 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.

_______________________________________________________________

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 Docket  Number  BC-2003-
00149 in Executive Session on 20 August 2003, under the provisions  of
AFI 36-2603:

      Ms. Olga M. Crerar, Panel Chair
      Ms. Leslie Abbott, Member
      Mr. James W. Russell, III, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 Jan 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Memorandum, BCMR Medical Consultant,
                dated 4 Apr 03.
    Exhibit D.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 1 May 03.
    Exhibit E.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 16 Jun 03.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Jun 03.




                                   OLGA M. CRERAR
                                   Panel Chair