RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02108

XXXXXXXXXX				COUNSEL:  NONE

					HEARING DESIRED:  NO 



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His narrative reason for separation of “Adjustment Disorder” be 
changed to “Medical” so he can receive Department of Veterans 
Affairs (DVA) medical care for disorders caused by his military 
service.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His narrative reason for separation “Adjustment Disorder” is too 
broad of a reason, unjust and an error based on the medical 
diagnosis.

In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of his DD 
Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, 
administrative discharge package and memorandums. 

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 15 May 07, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force.  He 
was credited with 29 days of total active service. 

On 11 Jan 11, the Board considered and denied the applicant’s 
request to upgrade his uncharacterized service to honorable.  
However, the Board voted to correct his records to show that he 
was discharged on 13 Jun 07, with a narrative reason for 
separation of “Adjustment Disorder” rather than “Personality 
Disorder,” and a separation code of “JFY” rather than “JFX.”

The applicant provides no rationale as to why his untimely 
application should be considered.





AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AETC/SGPS recommends denial.  Based on the documentation on file 
in the master personnel records, the separation was done in 
accordance with established policy and administrative procedures.

During the applicant’s second week of training he was seen at 
Wilford Hall Medical Center (WHMC), Mental Health department for 
an evaluation.  He stated he was depressed, unable to concentrate 
and having trouble sleeping and wanted to separate to finish 
college.  He was diagnosed with an “Adjustment Disorder” with 
mixed anxiety and depressed mood.  According to a 23 May 07, 
document it was noted that he previously attempted suicide in Dec 
06 and continued to have serious thoughts of suicide, while in 
Basic Military Training School (BMTS).  Since there is no medical 
exam or history to review, it is unknown if this history was 
disclosed to the Chief Medical Officer at the Military Entrance 
Processing Station (MEPS).  Following his mental health evaluation 
with his pre-service mental history it was felt that his condition 
existed prior to service.  The applicant acknowledged he 
understood the diagnosis and treatment plan and subsequently he 
was processed for an entry-level separation.  

The complete SGPS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial.  Based on documentation on file in 
the master personnel records, the discharge to include the 
Separation Program Designator (SPD) code, the narrative reason for 
separation and character of service was consistent with the 
procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge 
instruction and was within the discretion of the discharge 
authority.

The applicant was seen by the Behavioral Analysis Service were he 
reported feelings of anger and impulsive behavior while in BMTS to 
include punching a locker and cutting on his left arm with 
scissors in an attempt to help relieve his emotional turmoil.  He 
reported death ideation but denied suicidal/homicidal ideation.  
It was concluded the applicant’s emotional instability, impulsive 
behavior, and lack of motivation suggested a poor prognosis for 
his adaptation to the military environment.

The applicant’s mental health evaluation suggested his diagnosis 
did not meet retention standards for continued military service 
and was so severe that his ability to function effectively in a 
military environment was significantly impaired.  The applicant 
reviewed the report and acknowledged via signature that he agreed 
with the findings and gave his concurrence to share these findings 
with his commander.  As a result, he was processed for immediate 
discharge.

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 D.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the 
applicant on 12 Jan 15, for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit E).  As of this date, no response has been received by 
this office.


ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Clinical Psychology Consultant recommends denial.  AFI 
48-123, states that “an adjustment disorder may render an Airmen 
unsuitable for continued military service and subject to 
administrative discharge under AFI 36-3208, Administrative 
Separation of Airmen.  The applicant was discharged for an 
adjustment disorder, the symptoms of which were clearly disruptive 
to his duty performance.  

The applicant’s contention that an adjustment disorder is too 
broad and possibly resulted from his claim of other documented 
disorders is not supported by the facts and evidence submitted.  

The consultant concedes the probability that the applicant will 
experience similar mental health symptoms if he reenters basic 
military training is difficult to deduce.  However, it is known 
that basic military training remains a very stressful ordeal for 
most individuals.  The demanding, often austere, environments 
faced by members of all military service components also place the 
applicant in a position of elevated risk for relapse.  It is 
unclear what new coping strategies the applicant has developed in 
the time that has passed since his discharge that will allow him 
to be resilient in the face of such stressors.   

The consultant notes the applicant requests that he be allowed to 
obtain medical treatment at the DVA for disorders he believes were 
directly caused by his enlistment.  However, it is unclear what 
mental disorders aside from the acute adjustment disorder are 
believed to be service-incurred, as no documentation was provided 
to support this request.  In accordance with Department of Defense 
Instruction 1332.38, Physical Disability Evaluation in order to be 
entered into the Disability Evaluation System (DES) and receive a 
medical separation the applicant must have met criteria for a 
physical disability as listed in DoDI 1332.38.  The term “physical 
disability” includes mental disease, but not such inherent defects 
as behavioral disorders, adjustment disorders, personality 
disorders and primary mental deficiencies.”  The applicant’s 
mental health diagnosis did not meet DES processing criteria as it 
rendered him unsuitable for continued military service rather than 
unfit.  The discharge recommendation from the Behavioral Analysis 
Service reflects no conditions were present which required DES 
processing.  

The complete Clinical Psychology Consultant evaluation is at 
Exhibit F.  


APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant 
on 18 Jun 15, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit G).  
As of this date, no response has been received by this office.


FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD:

After careful consideration of applicant’s request and the 
available evidence of record, we find the application untimely.  
The applicant did not file within three years after the alleged 
error or injustice was discovered as required by Title 10, United 
States Code, Section 1552 and Air Force Instruction 36-2603.  The 
applicant has not shown a plausible reason for the delay in 
filing, and we are not persuaded that the record raises issues of 
error or injustice which require resolution on the merits.  Thus, 
we cannot conclude it would be in the interest of justice to 
excuse the applicant’s failure to file in a timely manner.  


THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The application was not timely filed and it would not be in the 
interest of justice to waive the untimeliness.  It is the decision 
of the Board, therefore, to reject the application as untimely.


The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number 
BC-2014-02108 in Executive Session on 22 Jul 15, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	 , Panel Chair
	 , Member
	 , Member


The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2014-02108 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 19 May 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AETC/SGPS, dated 3 Jun 14.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 9 Jun 14.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 Jan 15.
	Exhibit F.  Letter, BCMR Clinical Psychology Consultant, 
        	    dated 12 Jun 15.
	Exhibit G.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Jun 15.