RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01045
            INDEX CODE:  108.01
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her uncharacterized entry-level separation be changed to  reflect  that  she
was honorably discharged due to a medical disability.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She was discharged with an entry-level separation after being  labeled  with
a personality disorder. She has dysthymia, a form of  depression,  which  is
not a personality disorder, but a psychiatric condition she has  no  control
over.  She was diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress  Disorder  (PTSD)  while
in the service.  She is now service-connected  for  this  condition  by  the
Department of Veterans’ Affairs (DVA).  She was looked  at  as  someone  who
wanted out of the Air Force and not given much in  the  way  of  psychiatric
treatments or counseling.  She suffered from a  medical  condition  and  was
not just someone who wanted out of the Air Force.  She  was  a  young  woman
who was mentally ill and not  receiving  adequate  medical  care.   She  was
treated for depression and continued to suffer depression on a daily  basis.
 She does not have a personality disorder and never did.

In support of her request applicant provided a personal statement,  extracts
from her military medical records, documents extracted from her DVA  medical
records, and documentation associated with her  DVA  rating  decision.   Her
complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 11 Feb 98  in  the  grade  of
airman first class.

On 21  Jul  98,  applicant  was  notified  by  her  commander  that  he  was
recommending that she be discharged from the Air Force  in  accordance  with
AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5.11.1.  The specific reason for  this
action was she was  diagnosed  by  a  clinical  psychologist  as  having  an
Adjustment Disorder, with mixed emotions.  She was advised of her rights  in
this matter and acknowledged receipt of the notification on that same  date.
 Applicant waived her right to consult counsel and  elected  not  to  submit
statements on her own behalf.  In a legal review of  the  case,  the  deputy
staff judge advocate, found the case legally sufficient.  On 31 Jul 98,  the
discharge authority concurred with the recommendation and directed that  she
be  discharged  with  an  entry-level  separation  without   probation   and
rehabilitation.  Applicant was discharged from the Air Force on  3  Aug  98.
She served 5 months and 23 days on active duty.

Applicant's DD Form 214 has been administratively corrected to  reflect  her
reason for separation as "Secretarial Authority."

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends the applicant’s narrative reason  for
discharge be changed to Secretarial Authority and  that  no  change  to  her
characterization of service or reenlistment eligibility code  is  warranted.
The Medical Consultant states  her  symptoms  of  Adjustment  Disorder  were
related to a pre-service sexual assault and the  stresses  of  the  military
environment.  Individuals who develop Adjustment Disorder due to the  stress
of the routine rigors of  military  service  are  not  suited  for  military
service and are subject  to  administrative  discharge.   Approximately  two
months after her discharge she was diagnosed  by  the  DVA  with  Dysthymia.
However, no subsequent information is available that would suggest that  any
diagnostic error occurred.  The  stress  of  separation  from  the  military
would be  expected  to  produce  continued  or  even  worsened  symptoms  of
depressed mood.  The DVA examination was apparently without the  benefit  of
service medical records.

The 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  Control
Disorders.  Since  the  applicant  was  not  diagnosed  with  a  personality
disorder and was further not noted  to  demonstrate  maladaptive  traits  or
misconduct suggestive of a personality disorder, it is  inaccurate  to  list
the  narrative  reason  as  personality  disorder.  The  Medical  Consultant
evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  DPPRS concurs with the recommendation of  the
BCMR  Medical  Consultant  and  states  that   airmen   are   given   entry-
level/uncharacterized service characterization when separation is  initiated
in the first 180 days of  continuous  service.   The  DoD  determined  if  a
member served less than 180 days continuous  active  service,  it  would  be
unfair to the member and service  to  characterize  their  limited  service.
The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant states that she is very disturbed at how a film with very  graphic
sexually, physically, and very abusive scenes were "OK"  to  be  viewed  for
entertainment in a military classroom.  A person does not have to  be  raped
to find this sort of entertainment offensive.  When  she  mentioned  to  the
class captain that the film was inappropriate she was  made  fun  of,  joked
at, and made to feel that sexual abuse is  a  joking  matter.   She  excused
herself to the bathroom and began to question the morality of  the  military
and broke down and cried.

An unfortunate event, which occurred before her military  career,  is  being
held against her.  It was not the event or the film that disturbed her,  but
the morality of others which made her full of fear and inner rage.  She  was
informed by counselors from the hospital that she should be  separated  from
the military.  Applicant asks, what  part  of  that  is  not  medical?   Her
complete submission is at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided  by  existing  law  or
regulations.

2.  The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest  of
justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of error or injustice.  We  are  not  persuaded  by  the  evidence
presented that the uncharacterized entry-level separation  received  by  the
former member should be changed.    Uncharacterized  separation  is  not  an
unfavorable reflection upon the applicant's military service nor  should  it
be confused with other types of separation.  Rather, as  was  noted  by  the
Air Force office of primary responsibility, an entry-level  separation  with
uncharacterized service is used in those cases where the member has not  yet
completed six months of service at the  time  separation  proceedings  were,
for  whatever  reason,  initiated.   Hence,  an  uncharacterized  separation
merely connotes the brevity of an individual's  membership  in  the  service
and may not, in and of itself, be  viewed  as  a  defamation  of  character.
Further, we see no evidence, which would lead us  to  believe  that  at  the
time of her  separation,  a  physical  condition  existed  that  would  have
disqualified her from worldwide military  service.   Therefore,  we  see  no
reason why she would have been eligible for consideration in the  disability
evaluation  system.    Therefore,   we   agree   with   the   opinions   and
recommendation 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.   In  the  absence  of  persuasive
evidence to the contrary, we find no 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 AFBCMR Docket Number  BC-2003-
01045 in Executive Session on 1 Oct 03, under  the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

      Mr. Frederick R. Beaman III, Panel Chair
      Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Member
      Mr. Michael J. Maglio, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 3 Apr 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 29 Jul 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 21 Aug 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Aug 03.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated 8 Sep 03.




                                   FREDERICK R. BEAMAN III
                                   Panel Chair