RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01078 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her reentry (RE) code of “2C” (involuntarily separated with a honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service) be changed to a “4C” RE Code (separated for concealment of juvenile records, minority, failure to meet physical standards for enlistment, failure to obtain a 9.0 reading grade level as measured by the Air Force Reading Abilities Test (AFRAT), or void enlistments). _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She should not be penalized for her recruiter’s error and lack of judgment for withholding information. She would like to reenter another branch of the military. In support of her request, the applicant provides copies of two medical evaluations and a DD Form 293, Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 16 Jun 09, the applicant entered the Regular Air Force. On 15 Sep 09, the applicant was seen at the Behavioral Analysis Service (BAS) at Lackland AFB. The evaluation revealed the applicant received psychiatric care in May 2004, prior to her enlistment, and it was not disclosed on her enlistment documents. The evaluator recommended her retention. The applicant concurred with the recommendation and provided a written statement on 30 Oct 09. On 4 Nov 09, she was notified by her commander of pending discharge action. Specifically, the commander cited “Defective Enlistment” based on her DD Form 2807-1, Report of Mental History, as the basis for discharge. On 12 Nov 09, the assistant staff judge advocate found the case legally sufficient and recommended discharge with an entry level separation. The discharge authority concurred and directed an entry level separation for Erroneous Enlistment. On 13 Nov 09, the applicant was discharged with an uncharacterized entry level separation with the narrative reason for separation of “Erroneous Entry (Other)” and a RE Code of “2C.” _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial. DPSOA states the RE code of 2C is required based on the priority of RE codes. Further, the applicant did not provide any evidence that proves an error or injustice occurred in her separation processing. The complete HQ AFPC/DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AETC/SGPS states they support a change in the applicant’s RE code which would allow her to reapply for military service. SGPS states she seems to have remained asymptomatic and has done well since her separation. The medical evaluations presented by the applicant support her request for a change in her RE code. The complete HQ AETC/SGPS evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 9 Jul 10 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). As of this date, this office has not received a response. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial. The BCMR Medical Consultant states that he empathizes with the dilemma confronted by the applicant during her period of abuse and acknowledges her alleged reason for not initially disclosing her previous hospitalization. However, this does not explain or invalidate the accuracy of the multiple diagnosed mental disorders appearing on her Military Entrance Processing Station (MEPS) document as disqualifying. He further states the Board has to determine if the applicant is a reasonable risk for returning to military service, noting that she demonstrated an absence of overt or acute manifestations of a mental disorder both prior to separation in September 2009 and upon re-evaluation in February 2010. It remains unknown and unknowledgeable what the applicant’s level of response will be if she is re-exposed to the harsh rigors of training and other realities of military service; particularly in the context of the nation’s current wartime posture and the extreme mental and physical stressors confronting deployed members of all military departments; and sparing no particular Service component or career field. The BCMR Medical Consultant states he cannot predict the future in this case, but recommends erring towards protecting both the applicant’s well-being and eliminating any unnecessary accompanying liability. Further, the applicant has not met the burden of proof of an error or injustice that warrants a change of RE code. If the Board grants the applicant the desired relief as recommended by HQ AETC/SGPS, the applicant would have yet to be accepted into military service, either through a waiver (which has been denied once by the Air Force) and/or clearance through MEPS medical officials; as would be required of any new recruit. The applicant should also be aware that a change of RE code to “4C” represents a person “separated for concealment of juvenile records,” among other reasons, and has the potential of being viewed as a greater detriment to her than the current “Erroneous Entry” currently showing on her DD Form 214. A more favorable RE code of “3K” would better serve the applicant’s needs. The complete BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit F. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: She concurs with the “3K” RE code as mentioned by the BCMR Medical Consultant. She reported her stay at the mental health center, which was a one-time visit that had several diagnoses by a nurse. Her recruiter advised her not to include the visit since it was for family issues. She had no follow-up or recurring stays in another state or local facilities. She was a minor at that time and had no say on where her parents put her and she was unable to leave at her own free will. During the same year, she was put in foster care with her brothers due to her parent’s “lack of responsibilities, morals, and drug consumption” in front of them. She took it upon herself to separate herself from family and friends to better her life. She was the first in her family to graduate from high school and is presently attending college as a criminal justice major. She has always had a passion for the Air Force and if given the opportunity, she will strive to be a valued military soldier. The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit H. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. 2. The application was timely filed. 3. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. While the applicant attributes her failure to disclose potentially disqualifying information regarding her mental health treatments to the advice of her recruiter, it cannot be conclusively determined from the evidence of record who was at fault. Nevertheless, after considering all the circumstances of the case, we believe it is appropriate to provide the applicant the opportunity to seek reentry into the military by assigning her a waiverable code. In coming to this decision, we carefully considered the recommendation of the BCMR Medical Consultant. However, we note that at the time of the applicant’s discharge, it was recommended she be granted a waiver for retention and a mental health evaluation determined that she was operating within the normal limits of psychological functioning. Additionally, she has provided an evaluation from a civilian provider which opines there are no reasons why the applicant could not serve in the military. Although we believe the applicant should be provided the opportunity to seek reentry, our decision in no way guarantees that she will achieve a successful outcome. Whether she is successful will be determined based on the needs of the service to which she applies and her ability to meet their established standards. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we believe the applicant’s records should be corrected as indicated below. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 13 November 2009, she was separated with an uncharacterized entry level separation under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 with a reentry (RE) code of 3K. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC- 2010-01078 in Executive Session on 25 January 2011, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The following documentary evidence was considered for Docket Number BC-2010-01078: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 10 Feb 10, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSOA, dated 14 Jun 10. Exhibit D. Letter, HQ AETC/SGPS, dated 30 Jun 10. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Jul 10. Exhibit F. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 3 Nov 10. Exhibit G. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 8 Dec 10. Exhibit H. Letter, Applicant, dated 29 Dec 10.