RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-00947

			COUNSEL:  NONE 

			HEARING DESIRED: NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  His narrative reason for separation be changed from 
“Adjustment Disorder” to “Secretarial Authority” and his 
separation code be changed from “JFY” to “JFF.”_  

2.  His character of service be changed from uncharacterized to 
honorable.  

3.  His Re-entry (RE) code of “2C,” Approved Honorable 
Involuntary Separation or Entry Level Separation, be changed to 
allow him to reenlist in the military.  

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

When he  arrived at basic training all was well until he 
received disturbing news from home that his relationship with 
his girlfriend was ending.  Additionally he received word that 
there was a new sibling on the way, that he would not be able to 
see, and his grandmother's health was suffering.  These 
developments while at basic training caused him a lot of stress 
and sadness and a lapse in judgment led him to seek guidance at 
the Behavioral Analysis Service (BAS).  After two brief sessions 
with a social worker, not a psychologist, the determination was 
made that he would be given a separation for an adjustment 
disorder, with his concurrence.  

At that time he was in such a confused state that he signed his 
concurrence for an adjustment disorder separation under duress.  
This was a mistake. What was a greater mistake; however, was for 
the social worker, under the direction of the  psychologist, to 
issue a recommendation of an adjustment disorder as he was given 
too short a timeframe for improvement.   Their meetings were 
only one week apart. He believes that had he been able to speak 
with a trained psychologist and had he been given more time he 
would have improved and graduated basic training.  It was too 
hasty a decision to separate him for a mental disorder before he 
had time to show improvement.  He believes two sessions with a 
social worker is not enough to warrant a mental disorder 
diagnosis, a separation from the military, and a barring from 
future service.  

In support of his request the applicant submitted a personal 
statement, a copy of his certificate of appreciation from the 
Air Force Recruiting Service and an excerpt, from an unnamed 
source, regarding adjustment disorders.  

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

According to copies of documents extracted from the Automated 
Records Management System (ARMS) the applicant enlisted in the 
Regular Air Force on 18 December 2012.  

On 23 January 2013 the applicant was notified by his commander 
that he was recommending him for discharge from the Air Force 
under the provisions of AFPD 36-32 Military Retirements and 
Separations and AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of 
Airmen, Chapter 5, Section 5B, Involuntary Convenience of the 
Government, paragraph 5.11, Conditions that Interfere with 
Military Service, paragraph 5.11.9.1, under Mental Disorders.  
The specific reason for this action was; the applicant was 
diagnosed as having a mental disorder as contained in the 
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV).  
They determined this condition interfered with duty performance 
and conduct and was severe enough that his ability to function 
in the military was significantly impaired evaluation by a 
licensed psychologist and was diagnosed as having a personality 
disorder.  The applicant acknowledged receipt of the 
notification of discharge and was advised of his right to 
consult counsel and submit a statement to the commander for 
consideration.  He waived his rights to consult counsel and 
submit a statement in his behalf. 

Subsequent to the file being found legally sufficient the 
discharge authority approved the recommendation and directed the 
applicant be separated with an entry level separation.  The 
applicant was released on 25 January 2013, with a narrative 
reason for separation of “Adjustment Disorder” and a separation 
code of “JFY.”  

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

1.  AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial.  DPSOR states the applicant's 
diagnosis disqualified him for the personnel reliability program 
(PRP), security clearance, and weapons handling, which did not 
allow him to continue further training.  It also disqualified 
him from retention in the Air Force.

2.  The applicant was seen at the Behavioral Analysis Service 
(BAS) for two visits after self-referral for difficulty 
adjusting to BMT including hopelessness, low motivation and 
symptoms of depressed mood.  At the time of the applicant's 
discharge he stated his current symptoms had increasingly 
worsened since the beginning of training.   The applicant also 
reported his current symptoms included sleep latency issues, 
decreased interest, low energy, excessive guilt, poor 
concentration, decreased appetite, and decreased activity.   The 
applicant denies any history of mental health problems, but his 
family history was positive for major affective disorders.  The 
applicant's  mental health evaluation stated that due to his 
symptoms, his motivation to continue in training was 
significantly low.  The report also stated the combination of 
the applicant's mental health disorder and low motivation which 
would likely cause problems with his adaptation to military life 
and become a liability to the USA. Therefore, it was recommended 
that the applicant be discharged.  

3.  Airmen are given entry-level separation/uncharacterized  
service characterization when separation is initiated in the 
first 180 days continuous active service.  The Department of 
Defense (DoD) determined if a member served less than 180 days 
continuous active service, it would be unfair to the member and 
the service to characterize their limited service.  Therefore, 
the uncharacterized character of service on her DD Form 214 is 
correct and in accordance with DoD and Air Force instructions.  

4.  Based on the documentation on file in the master personnel 
records, the discharge to include the narrative reason for 
separation and separation code was consistent with the 
procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge 
instruction and was within the discretion of the discharge 
authority.  They found no evidence of an error or injustice in 
the processing of the applicant's discharge.

The complete AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial.  DPSOA states the RE Code 2C is 
required based on the entry level separation with 
uncharacterized service and the applicant does not provide any 
evidence of an error or injustice in reference to his RE Code.  

The complete AFPC/DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D. 

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the 
applicant on 10 May 2013 for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit E).  To date, this office has not received a response. 

________________________________________________________________

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 and are not persuaded that it supports a determination 
that the applicant was improperly separated from active duty.  
The narrative reason for separation, character of service, and 
RE code which were issued at the time of the applicant’s 
separation accurately reflect the circumstances of his 
separation and we do not find it to be in error or unjust.  In 
view of the above and absent persuasive evidence to the 
contrary, we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the 
Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their 
rationale as the basis for our determination in this case.  
Accordingly, the applicant’s requests are not favorably 
considered.  

________________________________________________________________

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 this application 
in Executive Session on 5 November 2013, under the provisions of 
AFI 36-2603:

			, Panel Chair
     			, Member
			, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR 
Docket Number BC-2013-00947:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149 dated 18 February 2013, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 14 April 2013.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 7 May 2013.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 May 2013. 




                                   
                                   Panel Chair