RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-02881

 						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Reentry (RE) code “2C” which denotes “Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or Entry Level Separation (ELS) without characterization of service” and narrative reason for separation of “Adjustment Disorder” be changed to allow reenlistment in the Air Force.  

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Following his separation, he saw a psychologist who told him he was okay for service and that he was just experiencing homesickness.  He provides letters from his psychologist dated 8 and 14 October 2014 which state in their professional opinion he has no mental health issues, is fit to serve and past mental health concerns will not develop in the future.  

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 11 September 2012, the applicant entered the Regular Air Force.

According to the mental health evaluation dated 17 October 2012, the applicant was in medical hold for bilateral knee pain after completion of two weeks of training at Basic Military Training (BMT) when he was seen in the Behavioral Analysis Service (BAS) for voluntary mental health evaluation on self-referral for low-level depressive symptoms complicated by periodic morbid/non-suicidal ideation.  He endorsed low-level depressive symptoms secondary to geographical separation from his primary support system, guilt about not honoring his promise to take care of his sister which was made subsequent to his mother’s death three years earlier and conviction that the military was not for him.  He asserted his depressed mood resulted in an impairment in functioning.  The applicant was diagnosed with adjustment disorder with depression.  He was cleared for an ELS from a MH perspective and returned to his command with the recommendation that he be processed for administrative discharge.  

On 26 October 2012, the applicant was notified by his commander that he was recommending he be discharged from the Air Force for a condition that interferes with military service, specifically for mental disorders in accordance with AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen.  The applicant was diagnosed by the 559th Medical Operations Squadron, Behavioral Analysis Service, as having a mental disorder as contained in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV).  It was determined the applicant’s diagnosis of adjustment disorder with depression interfered with duty performance and conduct and was severe enough that his ability to function in the military was significantly impaired.  

On 26 October 2012, the applicant acknowledged the discharge notification, waived his right to consult counsel and declined to submit statements in his own behalf.  

On 29 October 2012, the discharge authority approved the recommendation that the applicant be discharged.

On 30 October 2012, the applicant was discharged with an ELS, uncharacterized character of service, a narrative reason for separation of “Adjustment Disorder” and RE Code “2C.”  He served 1 month and 20 days of active duty service.  

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandums prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibits C, D, E and G.    

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AETC/SGPS recommends approval.  Based on a review of the applicant’s records during his BMT tenure and the current evaluations submitted, SGPS feels it is warranted to revise his RE code to allow reenlistment into the Air Force.  His reentry is contingent on his passing the Military Entrance Processing Station (MEPS) physical examination.    

A complete copy of the AETC/SGPS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DP3ST recommends denial.  The applicant does not provide any evidence of an error or injustice in reference to his RE code.  The applicant is asking for a second chance to join the military.  Since the medical authority states he is medically cleared from the previous discharge condition, it would be more appropriate for recruiting services to process a waiver of the RE code “2C” than change his RE code from the correct RE code.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DP3ST evaluation is at Exhibit D.

AFPC/DP2STM-SEP recommends denial.  Based on the documentation on file in his records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge instruction and was within the discretion of the discharge authority.  DP2STM-SEP found no evidence of an error or injustice in the processing of the applicant’s discharge.

The Separation Program Designator (SPD) code and narrative reason for separation are correct as indicated on the DD Form 214.  The character of service is also correct as airmen are given an ELS/uncharacterized service characterization when separation is initiated in the first 180 days of continuous active service.  The DOD determined if a member served less than 180 days continuous active service, it would be unfair to the member and the service to characterize their limited service.  Therefore, the uncharacterized character of service on his DD Form 214 is correct and in accordance with DOD and Air Force instructions.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DP2STM-SEP evaluation is at Exhibit E.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 18 February 2016 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit F).  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Psychiatric Consultant recommends denial.  The evidence is insufficient to warrant the desired change of the record.  The decision of the military department did not represent an error or injustice.

DODI 6130.03, Medical Standards for Appointment, Enlistment or Induction in the Military Service, sets the conditions whereby a candidate can enter the military service and also sets exclusions for entrance.  Per 10 U.S.C. § 113, anyone with a single adjustment disorder within the previous three months is not acceptable for enlistment.  This same code excludes anyone with a history of any condition that in the opinion of the medical officer shall significantly interfere with the successful performance of military duty or training.  The explanation of this code is that a psychiatric assessment that is made of someone when they are in training holds more validity in determining their future potential for military service than any assessment made when they are not in the same kind of stressful environment.  His psychiatrist reported that the applicant’s experience of being in the military caused him undo stress.  This emotional reaction developed after only a short time into the training period, so it is reasonable to predict in a highly stressful environment, as might be expected in military service, the applicant would decompensate even further.  The military is not well suited for everyone and clearly this applicant did not find it conducive to his wellbeing.  

A complete copy of the BCMR Psychiatric Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit G.  

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the BCMR Psychiatric Consultant evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 24 August 2016 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit H).  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 an error or injustice.  While we note AETC/SGPS recommends changing the applicant’s RE code to allow reenlistment into the Air Force; we disagree.  In this respect, we note the applicant has provided no evidence to substantiate an error or injustice occurred in the processing of his discharge.  Based on the preponderance of the evidence it appears the applicant’s discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge instruction and was within the discretion of the discharge authority.  Therefore, we agree with the opinions and recommendations of AFPC/DP3ST, AFPC/DP2STM-SEP and the BCMR Psychiatric Consultant and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  Furthermore, as pointed out by AFPC/DP3ST, it would be more appropriate for recruiting service to process a waiver of the RE code “2C” for reentry if he is medically cleared rather than changing the applicant’s RE code of “2C” which is correct.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief.

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-02881 in Executive Session on 6 October 2016 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	 , Panel Chair
	 , Member
	 , Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 26 June 2015, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AETC/SGPS, dated 23 December 2015.
	Exhibit D.  Memorandum, AFPC/DP3ST, dated 30 December 2015.
	Exhibit E.  Memorandum, AFPC/DP2STM-SEP, dated 6 January 
			  2016.
	Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 18 February 2016.
	Exhibit G.  Memorandum, BCMR Psychiatric Consultant, dated
			  15 August 2016.
	Exhibit H.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 24 August 2016.  

Pursuant to paragraph 1 of AFI 36-2603 (Title 32 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 865.1), it is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled matter.