RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-00454
		INDEX CODE:  110.02
		COUNSEL:  

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of RE-2C be changed.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He would like to reenlist in the Air Force.

In support of the application, the applicant submits a copy of his separation document.  The applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 2 April 2002, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force at the age of 19 in the grade of airman basic (E-1) for a period of four (4) years.  After completing basic military training, the applicant entered technical training as a mental health service helper.  On 25 September 2002, based on his commander’s referral, the applicant was evaluated by a neuropsychologist.  He was diagnosed as having a mental disorder as contained in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV).

The DSM-IV Diagnosis were:

	Axis I:  Occupational Problem
	Axis II:  Personality Disorder Not Otherwise Specified

In a Mental Health Evaluation dated 2 October 2002, a clinical psychologist recommended the applicant for discharge from the Air Force.  The examiner indicated that as a result of the diagnoses, the applicant was deemed unsuitable for continued military service.  He recommended expeditious administrative separation.

On 28 October 2002, the applicant’s commander notified the applicant that he was recommending the applicant be separated from the Air Force under the provisions of AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-3208 because of the mental health diagnosis that significantly impaired his ability to function in the military.  The applicant was advised of his rights.  The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification and, after consulting military legal counsel, submitted a statement on his own behalf.  The commander thereafter initiated a recommendation for the applicant’s separation with an honorable discharge.  In a legal review of the discharge case file dated 12 November 2002, the Deputy Staff Judge Advocate found the file was legally sufficient and concurred with the commander’s recommendation that the applicant be separated from the service with an honorable discharge.  On 14 November 2002, the discharge authority approved the recommended separation and directed the applicant be discharged for the reasons recommended by his commander, without the offer of probation and rehabilitation.

On 5 December 2002, the applicant was honorably discharged because of a personality disorder with a reentry code of 2C and a separation code of JFX.  Reentry code 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 his separation.  He had served eight months and four days on active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant opines no change is warranted to the applicant’s record.  The applicant was progressing satisfactorily through his coursework but later encountered difficulties adapting to the military training environment.  On 23 September 2002, by recommendation of an instructor, the applicant presented himself to the Mental Health Clinic.  The applicant was seen on follow-up for psychological testing because of instances of socially inappropriate behavior, including poor hygiene, talking to himself, and concerns regarding self-mutilating behavior.  He was diagnosed with a Personality Disorder, Not Otherwise Specified, incompatible with continued military service.  He was recommended for administrative discharge.  The BCMR Medical Consultant states the applicant’s a personality disorder warranted administrative discharge for unsuitability.  He concludes the action and disposition in this case are proper and equitable reflecting compliance with Air Force directives that implement the law.  A complete copy of the BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 18 June 2004 for review and comment.  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 an error or injustice warranting changes to the applicant’s reenlistment code.  Evidence has not been presented which would lead us to believe that the applicant’s RE code, which is directly related to his involuntary honorable discharge, is improper or contrary to the provisions of the governing regulations.  After several mental health evaluations, a military clinical psychologist rendered the above-cited diagnosis and recommended the applicant’s separation from the service.  We have seen no evidence by the applicant indicating the information contained in his medical records and discharge case file is erroneous, he was not afforded all rights to which he was entitled, or that his commanders abused their discretionary authority.  Furthermore, the applicant provided no evidence showing that he would be able to effectively perform his duties in the highly structured military environment.  We therefore concur with the opinion of the BCMR Medical Consultant, and find the applicant has failed to sustain his burden for providing a showing of error or injustice.  Accordingly, the applicant’s request is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of probable 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 in Executive Session on 30 September 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2004-00454:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 5 Feb 04, with attachment.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Med Consultant dated 14 Jun 04.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Jun 04.

                                   Panel Chair