RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01212
		INDEX CODE:  110.02
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  The narrative reason for his discharge be changed to "Convenience of the Government" or "Secretarial Authority".

2.  His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed to 3A.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

During the time he served on active duty he was suffering from an Adjustment Disorder.  His Adjustment Disorder led to his decision to admit to use of marijuana.  He had in fact not used marijuana and made the false statement out of hopelessness.  Up to that point, his service record was clean.  Prior to completing drug and alcohol rehabilitation he received treatment at Sembach Mental Health Clinic.  His last performance report prior to going overseas indicated a lower marking in Adaptability to Military Life and Bearing and Behavior, which should have indicated that he was having problems.  He sought counseling from the Chaplain while he was in technical training.  His mother was ill and eventually passed away.  He requested a hardship discharge, but his request was denied.  These combined problems in addition to his assignment overseas clearly indicated he was having problems.  A previously approved AFBCMR case, Docket Number BC-2002-01549, is similar to his situation.

In support of his request, applicant provided a personal statement, his mother's obituary, documentation associated with his request for hardship separation action, his Airman Performance Reports (APRs) closing 31 Jan 87 and 12 Dec 87, his Letter of Evaluation (LOE) closing 30 Oct 86, documents extracted from his medical records, documentation associated with his discharge action, and his training and education certificated.  His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 23 Oct 85.  He was promoted to the grade of airman first class having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 7 Dec 85.  On 15 Dec 87, applicant requested voluntary separation for humanitarian/hardship reasons.  On 29 Dec 87, his request was disapproved.  The discharge authority determined that his stated reasons did not qualify for early separation and that early separation was not in the best interest of the Air Force.  On 4 May 88, applicant was notified by his commander that he was recommending that he be honorably discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39-10, paragraph 5-49c, for drug abuse.  The reason for this action was his admission that he used marijuana while on active duty.  The applicant was advised of his rights in this matter and acknowledged receipt of the notification on that same date.  After consulting counsel, he elected not to submit statements on his own behalf.  In a legal review of the case file, the Staff Judge Advocate (SJA) found the case legally sufficient.  The SJA did not concur with the commander's recommendation for an honorable discharge and recommended discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge without probation or rehabilitation.  The discharge authority concurred with the SJA recommendation and directed he be discharged and issued a general discharge.  The applicant was discharged on 8 Nov 88.  He served 3 years and 16 days on active duty.

On 11 Jan 01, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered applicant's request for upgrade of his discharge to honorable and to change his reason for discharge.  The AFDRB granted his request to upgrade his discharge to honorable and denied his request to change the reason for his discharge.  

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial.  The Medical Consultant states the applicant developed symptoms of depressed mood due to the stress associated with his parents divorce and his mother's ongoing difficulties.  His first duty station was close to home enabling him to provide emotional support.  However, when he received orders to Germany, he applied for separation.  He presented to the mental health clinic shortly after his arrival to Germany with symptoms of depressed mood.  The mental health encounters did not result in a recommendation for administrative separation and on 29 Mar 8, he admitted to the use and possession of marijuana while on active duty.  He was issued a Letter of Reprimand.  His mental health provider noted that drug abuse was a method he used as an attempt to get out of the Air Force.  When the attempt failed, he expressed thoughts of suicide to accomplish his goal.  The commander subsequently initiated discharge action.  

The applicant was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder with Depressed Mood.  One of the features of Adjustment Disorder is that the condition resolves with relief of the stressors.  Not all members who develop Adjustment Disorder are automatically recommended for administrative discharge.  When the member is able to continue performing their military duties, a period of treatment often results in satisfactory resolution of symptoms and the ability to remain on active duty.  The documentation indicates he was able to perform his duty but was not motivated for therapy.  The Adjustment Disorder did not render him unable to distinguish right from wrong or unable to conform his behavior to the law.  His statement admitting drug use was a willful act to achieve his desire to separate from the Air Force.  The fact that he is functioning well at this time at home confirms his diagnosis of Adjustment Disorder, however it does not predict that he will at this time respond well to the stresses of military operations, deployment, or combat when separated from his familiar surroundings and usual support system.  Further, his post-service civilian experience with recurrent Adjustment Disorder is further predictive of an increased risk of recurrence of symptoms of Adjustment Disorder if re-exposed to the rigors of military service.  The Medical Consultant Evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  DPPRS states that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority.  The applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors in his discharge processing.  Separation for the "Convenience of the Government" is a generic term used to describe a number of voluntary and involuntary separations, and these separations have their own separation codes and narrative reason as designated by the DoD.  The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D.

AFPC/DPPAE recommends denial.  The RE code 2C "involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service" is correct.  No additional evidence has been provided to support changing the RE code.  The DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant states that the Medical Consultant missed the fact that had he been sent to Mental Health prior to his overseas assignment he could have possible been diagnosed and entered into a treatment program or received counseling.  Upon his arrival at Germany he was suffering from a severe Adjustment Disorder for which he is still on medication.  He cannot describe the hopelessness and depression that he was experiencing at the time of his statement of drug use.  While himself and others are ashamed of having seen a mental health professional, they are there to help.  He has been through a program and received help and functions successfully in any environment.  His complete submission is at Exhibit G.

_________________________________________________________________

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.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice that would warrant a change in his reason for discharge.  In this respect, we note that the narrative reason for the applicant's discharge from the Air Force reflects "Misconduct-Other Serious Offenses."  While we do not find his admission to drug abuse, in an attempt to affect his discharge from the Air Force appropriate, a thorough review of the evidence of record does not reveal any additional behavior on the applicant's part.  In addition, we note that in previous consideration of his case, the Air Force Discharge Review Board upgraded the characterization of his service from general to honorable.  Accordingly it is our opinion that his records should be corrected to reflect that the narrative reason for his discharge is "Secretarial Authority" and recommend his records be corrected as indicated below.

4.  Notwithstanding the above, insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice with respect to his request for a change of his RE code.  His contentions are duly noted; however, we do not find his assertions sufficiently persuasive to warrant upgrading his RE code.  It appears that the applicant's difficulties adapting to military life had its basis in his not being assigned to a preferred duty station.  While it appears that he has made a successful adjustment in the less-stressful civilian environment, we see no evidence, which would lead us to believe that he would now be amendable to the demands of military life.  Therefore, we agree with the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that he has not been the victim of an error or injustice with regards to this matter.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 8 November 1988, he was discharged under the provisions of AFR 35-10, paragraph 1-2 (Secretarial Authority), with a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of KFF.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered Docket Number bc-2003-01212 in Executive Session on 13 Nov 03, under the provisions of AFI 36‑2603:

All members voted to correct the records, as recommended.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 Apr 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 7 Jul 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRE, dated 25 Jul 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 30 Sep 03.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Oct 03.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, Applicant, not dated.

					

AFBCMR BC-2003-01212

MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

	Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that:

	The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 8 November 1988, he was discharged under the provisions of AFR 35-10, paragraph 1-2 (Secretarial Authority), with a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of KFF.