RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01742
		INDEX CODE:  110.02
		COUNSEL: NONE 

	 	HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed to a one.
________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She believes she was misdiagnosed with asthma.  Her diagnosis with depression stemmed from an abusive relationship and the abuser was subsequently court-martialed after her discharge for similar incidents.  She felt her only way out of this situation was to be discharged from the Air Force.

Subsequent to her discharge, she has not been treated for either of these conditions.

In support of her request, the applicant submits a personal statement, and copies of medical reports from civilian doctors.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force as an airman basic on 27 December 1995 for a term of 4 years.  She was seen at the mental health clinic on 17 September 1996 for three to four months of depressed mood.  The initial diagnosis included dysthymia disorder, agoraphobia without panic disorder, and dependent personality traits.  A follow-up evaluation on 19 September 1996 rendered a diagnosis of major depression vs. dysthymia and she was treated with the antidepressant medicine Prozac.  The applicant was hospitalized at a civilian hospital psychiatry unit on 20 July 1998, due to depsession with suicidal ideation.  Her discharge diagnosis included major depression, recurrent, severe without psychotic features as manifested by recurrent episodes of persistently depressed mood, markedly diminished interest or pleasure in activities, insomnia, loss of energy, feelings of worthlessness, diminished ability to concentrate, recurrent thoughts of death and suicide with these symptoms not being due to the effects of a drug, medical condition or bereavement and with these symptoms causing clinically significant impairment in social and occupational functioning.  Her medical evaluation board considered a diagnosis of mild intermittent asthma.  On 30 October 1998, the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IEPB) determined she was unfit for duty due to major depression, recurrent associated with existing prior to service dysthymia, and mild asthma and recommended discharge with severance pay.  On 10 November 1998, the applicant agreed with the findings and recommendations of the IPEB and waived her right to a formal hearing.

On 12 January 1999, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force, under the provision of AFI 36-3212, for a disability, (with severance pay).  She served 3 years and 16 days on active duty and received an RE code of “2Q” “Personnel medically retired or discharged”.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial.  The applicant’s history of recurrent major depression requiring hospitalization was clearly disqualifying for continued active duty.  Psychological testing during an asymptomatic period does not exclude a prior history of depression or predict that depression will not occur in the future.  Her reported history resolution of her symptoms once eliminating exposure to cat dander is consistent with an allergy to cats predisposing her to reactive airways disease.  Her history of cigarette smoking no doubt contributed to her recurrent episodes of bronchitis with bronchospasm.  Medical standards for enlistment and for continued service indicate that “asthma, including reactive airway disease, exercise induced bronchospasm or asthmatic bronchitis, reliably diagnosed at any age” is disqualifying for enlistment.

The applicant’s experience while on active duty indicates that she is a higher risk for recurrent problems when subjected to the rigors of military operational environments even though she is currently doing well.  Regardless, her history of depression is itself disqualifying for reenlistment.

Action and disposition in this case are proper and equitable reflecting compliance with Air Force directives that implement the law.

The BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPAE recommends denial.  The RE code of 2Q, “Personnel medically retired or discharged” is correct.  Waivers of RE codes for enlistment are considered and approval based on the needs of 

the respective military service and recruiting initiatives at the time of the enlistment inquiry.

The DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 21 Nov 03, for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS 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 to warrant changing her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code.  Evidence has not been provided in support of her appeal, which would lead us to believe that a change to her RE code is warranted.  Therefore, we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the BCMR Medical Consultant and the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

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 issue(s) 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 Docket Number BC-2003-01742 in Executive Session on 6 January 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated Apr 03, w/atch.
	Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.	Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 25 Aug 03.
	Exhibit D.	Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 6 Nov 03.
	Exhibit E.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Nov 03.

	Panel Chair