RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00155
INDEX CODE: 110.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed to allow him to
reenlist in military service.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
At the time he enlisted in the military, he was unable to handle the
pressure but now he feels he has all the tools to complete basic
training and be a fine serviceman.
Applicant's complete submission, with an attachment, is attached at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Air Force Reserves on 22 November 2002, as
an airman basic (AB) for a period of six years and entered active duty
on 25 February 2003 to attend Basic Military Training (BMT).
On 6 March 2003, the applicant underwent a Mental Health evaluation at
XXXXX XXXXX Medical Center (XXMC). The applicant reported he was
experiencing increased irritability, frustration, incidents of head
banging to release his frustration, difficulty breathing due to
increased nervousness and tension, problems with sleep and
concentration, intrusive memories and flashbacks of his past abuse as
a child. He also reported an incident of fleeting suicide ideation
while in BMT. The evaluation diagnosed the applicant with an
Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Disturbances of Emotions and Conduct.
The psychologist recommended the applicant be administratively
separated. His diagnosis of Adjustment Disorder did not meet the
retention standards for continued military service.
On 7 March 2003, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intent
to recommend him for an entry level discharge for fraudulent entry for
the following reason:
The applicant failed to inform his recruiter of his
history of suicide attempts.
The commander advised the applicant of his right to consult legal
counsel, and if he so desired an appointment would be made upon
request, and to submit statements in his own behalf. He was advised
that failure to consult with counsel or submit statements could
constitute his waiver of his rights to do so.
On 7 March 2003, the applicant, after consulting with counsel,
waived his right to submit a statement.
On 10 March 2003, a legal review was conducted in which the staff
judge advocate (SJA) recommended the applicant be separated with an
entry level separation.
The discharge authority approved the applicant be discharged with an
entry level separation.
The applicant was separated with an uncharacterized entry-level
separation on 13 March 2003 for fraudulent entry into the Air Force,
in the grade of airman first class (A1C) and issued an RE code of
“2C,” Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry-
level separation without characterization of service.
Applicant does not contest the accuracy of the RE code and after
reviewing the applicable instruction, AFI 36-2606, it appears the RE
code is correct.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPRS states based upon the documentation in the applicant's
records, they believe his discharge was consistent with the procedural
and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. Also, the
discharge was within the sound discretion of the discharge authority.
Air Force policy is that entry-level separations/uncharacterized
service characterizations are given to servicemembers who have not
completed more than 180 days of continuous active service. The
Department of Defense (DOD) determined if a servicemember served less
than 180 days of active service, that it would be unfair to the member
to characterize that service. The applicant's uncharacterized service
is correct and in accordance
with DOD and AFIs. The uncharacterized separation should not be
viewed as negative and not be confused with other types of
separations.
A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on
20 February 2004, for review and response. 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 error or injustice. After careful consideration of
the circumstances of this case and the evidence provided by the
applicant, we are not persuaded that the discharge action and the
resulting reenlistment code he received were in error or unjust.
Applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, we agree with the
opinions and recommendations of the Air Force and adopt their
rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not
been the victim of an error or injustice. Shortly after entering
basic military training, the applicant underwent a Mental Health
Evaluation and was diagnosed with an Adjustment Disorder with Mixed
Disturbances of Emotions and Conduct. The applicant’s diagnosis of an
Adjustment Disorder did not meet the retention standards for continued
military service. Therefore, in view of the above and 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2004-00155 in Executive Session on 23 March 2004 under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
Ms. Jean A. Reynolds, Member
Ms. Cheryl V. Jacobson, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 Jan 04, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 13 Feb 04.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 Feb 04.
RICHARD A. PETERSON
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02576
On 20 Feb 04, applicant’s DD Form 214 was administratively corrected/reissued reflecting the narrative reason for separation (Item 28) as “Secretarial Authority.” _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant stated that the applicant was not discharged due to her ovarian cyst (although recurrent disabling pain due to this condition is disqualifying for entry). At the time a member is separated from the Air Force, they...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03983
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-03983 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His narrative reason for separation and separation code be changed. The AFBCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPRS concurs with the AFBCMR Medical Consultant and recommends the applicant’s separation code...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02727
A medical record entry by the Mental Health Clinic on 10 April 2003, indicates the applicant was experiencing difficulty in coping with stress, depressed mood, and an inability adapting to the demands of his military occupation. On 23 May 2003, applicant was notified of his commander's intent to recommend him for discharge from the Air Force for a mental disorder. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03896
Based upon the documentation in the file, DPPRS believes the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. The HQ AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to applicant on 4 Apr 03 for review and response. As a result, he was subsequently separated from the Air Force by reason...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-00546
In support of his request, the applicant provided a character statement. In a mental health evaluation dated 7 Aug 08, he was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Anxiety and Depressed Mood. He received an RE code of 2C—“Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service.” The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPSOS recommends correcting the applicant’s discharge separation code to reflect “JFY” and...
In support of his appeal, the applicant provided a personal statement, character statements, a college acceptance letter, a statement from a clinical psychologist, his student training report and performance summary, an outprocessing checklist dated 13 Jan 98, a mental health evaluation dated 26 Jan 98, the commander’s memo directing a mental evaluation dated 27 Jan 98, the disenrollment action dated 6 Feb 98 and signed by the commander on 9 Feb 98, a notification letter dated 6 Feb 98, and...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00620
The applicant did not have a severe mental disorder and was not considered mentally disordered. In his recommendation for discharge, the commander indicated he was recommending the applicant be discharged with an entry-level separation. However, after reviewing the applicant’s request and the evidence of record, we find the narrative reason for his separation; i.e., personality disorder, to be inaccurate.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03272
On 1 May 2003, the discharge authority concurred with the recommendations and directed that he be discharged with an entry-level separation. Applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice; the application was denied...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02903
He received an RE code of 2C, which defined means “Involuntary separation with honorable discharge; or entry-level separation without characterization of service.” _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant found that no change to applicant’s record was warranted. AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D. AFPC/DPPAE verified that the RE code of 2C was correct. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in...
According to the Medical Consultant, the current Air Force instruction regulating separations for mental health problems does not allow flexibility for coding for other than “Personality Disorder,” an entirely different code sequence than that with which the applicant was diagnosed. A complete copy of the Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C. The Separations Branch, AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed this application and indicated that they concurred with the Medical...