RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-02075
		COUNSEL: NONE
		HEARING DESIRED: NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  His narrative reason for separation of “Adjustment Disorder” 
and separation code of “JFY” be changed.

2.  His Reentry (RE) code of “2C” which denotes “Involuntarily 
separated with an honorable discharge; or entry-level separation 
without characterization” be changed. 

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His discharge was improper and not properly evaluated.  He did 
not have any issues with anxiety prior to his enlistment into 
the military or at any other point in his life.  

He has no signs of mental illness or anxiety disorders. 

He wants to reenlist in the Air Force and pursue a career in law 
enforcement. 

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of his 
DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active 
Duty, Psychological Evaluation and doctor’s statement.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 18 Oct 11, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force.  

On 21 Feb 12, the applicant was diagnosed with an Adjustment 
Disorder with Anxiety by a staff psychiatrist.  Because his 
diagnosis was so severe, his ability to function effectively in 
the military environment was significantly impaired and did not 
meet retention standards for continued military service.  

On 22 Feb 12, the applicant was informed by his first sergeant 
of the possible ramifications of his mental health diagnosis.  
Specifically, he was informed that if he felt further counseling 
and/or therapy would not be effective in enabling him to 
function in the military environment, administrative discharge 
would be the most likely outcome.  The applicant acknowledged 
receipt of the notification of Mental Health Diagnosis 
Ramifications and stated that further therapy and/or counseling 
would not enable him to function in a military environment.  

On 24 Feb 12, the 362nd Training Squadron (362 TRS) Military 
Training Flight Chief forwarded the case to the 362 TRS/CC, with 
a recommendation that the applicant be eliminated from the F-
15 course and separated from the Air Force.  The 362 TRS/CC 
concurred with the recommendation. 

On 6 Mar 12, the applicant was notified of his commander’s 
intent to recommend that he be discharged from the Air Force 
under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation 
of Airmen for a mental disorder.  Specifically, the applicant 
was diagnosed with an Adjustment Disorder with Anxiety by a 
staff psychiatrist.  He acknowledged receipt of the notification 
of discharge.

On 12 Mar 12, after consulting with counsel, the applicant 
waived his right to submit a statement on his own behalf.  

On 19 Mar 12, the 82nd Training Wing Assistant Staff Judge 
Advocate reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient to 
support discharge and recommended the applicant receive an 
entry-level separation without the offer of probation or 
rehabilitation.  

On 20 Mar 12, the discharge authority approved the applicant’s 
discharge.  On 22 Mar 12, the applicant received an 
uncharacterized entry-level separation, with a separation code 
of JFY, and was issued an RE code of 2C.  He served five months 
and five days of total active service. 

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial of the applicant’s request to 
change his narrative reason for separation.  The documentation 
on file in the applicant’s master personnel records reflects the 
discharge to include the narrative reason for separation and 
separation code was consistent with the procedural and 
substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was 
within the 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 
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, 
his uncharacterized character of service is correct and in 
accordance with DoD and Air Force instructions.

The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial of the applicant’s request to 
change his RE code.  The applicant’s RE code 2C is required per 
AFI 36-2606, Reenlistments in the Air Force based on his entry-
level separation with an uncharacterized character of service.  

The applicant does not provide any proof of an error or 
injustice regarding his RE code.  

The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D.

AETC/SGPS addresses the medical aspects of the process related 
to his separation.  The applicant’s normal evaluation provided 
in this review may be the case now, but it does not negate his 
diagnosis and documented history from basic military training.  
Based on the documentation on file in the applicant’s records, 
the separation was done in accordance with established policy 
and administrative procedures. 

The complete SGPS evaluation is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the 
applicant on 15 Aug 13, for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit F).  As of this 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 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 an error or injustice.  After 
careful consideration of the circumstances of this case and the 
evidence provided by the applicant, we are not persuaded that 
any relief is warranted.  Therefore, 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 the applicant has not been the victim of an error or 
injustice.  In view of the above and in the absence of 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 Docket Number    
BC-2013-02075 in Executive Session on 30 Jan 14, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

				Panel Chair
				Member
				Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:  

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 20 Apr 13, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 21 Jun 13.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 23 Jul 13.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, AETC/SGPS, dated 8 Aug 13.
   Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Aug 13.




                                   
                                   Panel Chair