RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:				DOCKET NUMBER:  02-01023
INDEX CODE:  112.10 
	XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX		COUNSEL: NONE

	XXXXXXXXX					HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

Her reenlistment eligibility (RE) and her separation codes be changed to enable her to re-enter the Air Force.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The statement on her discharge papers that she engaged in multiple relationships while married is incorrect.  She is willing to undergo the necessary tests to prove that she does not have a personality disorder.  At the time of the evaluation that led to her discharge, she was affected by post-partum depression and was having marital problems.  She since has resolved the marital problems.  

She would like to reenlist in the military; however, her reenlistment code prevents her from doing so.  Her records need to be changed to show a different reason for discharge so she can reenter the Air Force.

In support of her application, the applicant provided a copy of her Certificate of Release or Discharge (DD Form 214).  The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 6 December 2000, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force at the age of 20 in the grade of airman first class for a period of four years.  On 26 January 2001, following her successful completion of basic military training, the applicant was enrolled in technical training.

On 10 May 2001, the applicant self-referred to the Life Skills Support Center (LSSC) for stress related to her adjustment to military life.  She returned to LSSC (on her own request) for a psychological evaluation for suitability for duty.  She was interviewed and underwent psychological testing on 18 July 2001.  The examining psychologist found the applicant’s mental disorder so severe that her ability to function in a military environment was significantly impaired.  The examiner’s recommendation was the applicant should be separated under the provisions of AFI 36‑3208, paragraph 5.11.1. 

On 31 July 2001, the applicant’s commander recommended the applicant be discharged for Mental Health Disorders.  The applicant was advised of her rights to consult counsel and submit a statement in her own behalf.  She waived her rights to consult counsel and to submit a statement on 31 July 2001.  In a legal review of the discharge case file, dated 2 August 2001, the Chief, Civil Law/Adverse Actions assigned to the staff of the discharge authority, found the file legally sufficient and recommended the applicant be separated for the reasons recommended by her commander without the offer of probation and rehabilitation.  The discharge authority approved the proposed separation on 9 August 2001.

On 17 August 2001, the applicant was honorably discharged because of personality disorder with an RE code of 2C and a separation code of JFX.  RE-2C is applied in those cases where the member is involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge.  The separation code is directly related to the reason and authority for her separation.  She had served 8 months and 12 days on active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPAE indicated that the reenlistment code 2C, “Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service” was properly accessed to the applicant’s record as she was discharged in accordance with Air Force directives.  The DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  The applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge process.  Additionally, she provided no facts warranting a change in her discharge.  The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D. 

The BCMR Medical Consultant summarized the information contained in the applicant’s personnel and medical records and is of the opinion that no change in the records is warranted.  Details of his evaluation are at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 18 October 2002, for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this office has received no 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.  Evidence has not been presented which would lead us to believe that the applicant’s RE and separation codes, which are directly related to her involuntary honorable discharge, are improper or contrary to the provisions of the governing regulations.  The record shows that less than 6 months after her enlistment and while enrolled in technical training, the applicant began to experience numerous problems adapting to military life.  Following several mental health evaluations, a military psychologist rendered the above-cited diagnosis and recommended her separation from the service.  Other than her own assertions, we have seen no evidence by the applicant indicating the information contained in her medical records and discharge case file is erroneous, she was not afforded all rights to which she was entitled, or that her commanders abused their discretionary authority.  Furthermore, the applicant has provided no evidence showing that she would now be able to effectively perform her duties in the highly structured military environment.  In this regard, the applicant’s assertions were thoroughly reviewed by the BCMR Medical Consultant and the applicant has provided no evidence that successfully rebuts his assessment of her case.  We therefore concur with his opinion and find the applicant has failed to sustain her burden for providing a showing of error or injustice.  Accordingly, the applicant’s request is not favorably considered. 

4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the request for a hearing is 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, AFBCMR Docket No. 02-01023, in Executive Session on 3 December 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

			Panel Chair
			Member
			Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, undated, with attachment. 
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 9 Oct 02.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 24 Jul 02.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 1 Jul 02.
	Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Oct 02.