RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01172 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The narrative reason for her separation of “Adjustment Disorder” be removed from block 28 of her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 1. The narrative phrase “adjustment disorder” may impede her ability to find civilian employment as a clinical social worker. She acknowledges adjusting to the military culture was difficult but contends she does not have a mental health condition. The characterization of her discharge has a negative stigma in the mental health community. Further, “adjustment disorder” is unnecessary because the Separation Program Designator (SPD) Code (GFY - involuntary discharge due an adjustment disorder) is already on the DD Form 214 in block 26. 2. The narrative wording is a Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPPA) violation (by not protecting her confidentiality) because it is based on a medical diagnosis and should not be on the form. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 30 Jun 12, the applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force. On 20 Mar 13, according to documentation provided by the applicant, the applicant’s commander referred her for a non- emergent mental health evaluation to determine if she had a mental health condition that could account for her display of behaviors leading to administrative actions. The evaluation revealed the applicant was experiencing symptoms of anxiety and depression likely attributable to both past and present life stressors. The applicant was deemed unsuitable for continued service based on the diagnosis of an adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depression. On 10 Mar 14, the applicant was furnished an honorable discharge, with a narrative reason for separation of “Adjustment Disorder,” and was credited with 1 year, 8 months, and 11 days of active service. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the memoranda prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are included at Exhibits C and D. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. After episodes at work where the applicant would excessively cry, exhibit increased anxiety, and have trouble with adapting to military customs and courtesies, the applicant’s commander directed her for a non-emergent mental health evaluation. Based on the evaluation, the commander notified her that he was recommending her for an honorable discharge for a diagnosis of Axis I, Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Anxiety and Depression; a condition that interferes with military service. The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge and was advised of her right to consult with legal counsel and submit statements on her own behalf. The discharge authority approved the separation and directed the applicant be discharged with an honorable service characterization. The narrative reason for separation and character of service was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge instruction and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/JA recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. Omitting block 28 as the applicant requests is not permissible; DoDI 1336.01, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214/5 Series), requires the DD Form 214 be prepared accurately and completely, to include a narrative reason for separation, separation code, and reentry code (if applicable). Based on the conditions upon which she separated, the narrative description in block 26 of her DD Form 214 accurately summarizes her service, regardless of any changes that occur post-service. With regard to impeding future employment, Copy 1 of the applicant’s DD Form 214 is sufficient proof of service without the conditions of her separation. Further, there is no basis for the assertion the narrative language is a HIPPA violation. Military medical providers may release protected health information to AFPC, without the individual's authorization or opportunity to object, when required by law or government regulation, such as those regulations governing the preparation of the DD Form 214 or separation process. A complete copy of the AFPC/JA evaluation is at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 28 Jul 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). As of this date, no response has been received by this office. 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. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, the Board majority agrees with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR) and adopts their rationale as the basis for its determination that the applicant is not the victim of an error or injustice. The majority finds no evidence of an error or injustice that occurred during the discharge process. Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and within the commander's discretionary authority and the applicant has provided no evidence which would lead us to believe the narrative reason for discharge was contrary to the provisions of the governing regulation. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Board majority finds no basis upon which to recommend granting the relief sought. RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD: A majority of the panel finds insufficient evidence of error or injustice and recommends the application be denied. The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-01172 in Executive Session on 17 Dec 14 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member By a majority vote, the Board voted to deny the application. voted to grant the application and has submitted a minority report. The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 10 Mar 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 9 Apr 14 Exhibit D. Memorandum, AFPC/JA, dated 13 May 14 Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Jul 14. Exhibit F. Minority Opinion, dated 23 Dec 15.