RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04212 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reentry (RE) code of “4K” (Medically disqualified for continued service, or the airman is pending evaluation by MEB/PEB), be changed. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He believes his record to be in error due to a misdiagnosis which led to his discharge. In support of his request, the applicant submits a letter from his psychologist who states the applicant does not have and has never had major depressive disorder or any other major mental illness. He further states the applicant is an excellent candidate for military service and would be an outstanding asset to any branch of the military. The applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 17 November 2009. The applicant was notified by his commander of his intent to recommend his discharge from the Air Force under the provisions of AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-3208. The specific reason was on or about 17 March 2010, the applicant was diagnosed as having a Major Depressive Disorder and an Anxiety Disorder. His depression and anxiety were so severe that his ability to function effectively in the military was significantly impaired. The applicant stated that he had a lack of motivation, decreased energy, decreased appetite, body aches, insomnia, an inability to concentrate and suicidal thoughts that the mental health professionals described as passive suicidal ideation. Based on his emotional state and behavior in class, and the fact that his behavior was not likely to change in the future - it was apparent that he could not function in the Air Force. Therefore, he was removed from his technical training apprentice course. He was advised of his rights in this matter and after consulting with counsel he elected not to submit statements on his own behalf. In a legal review of the case file, the 81st TRW/JAJ found the case legally sufficient and recommended separation. The discharge authority concurred with the recommendation and directed an entry level separation. The applicant was discharged on 7 April 2010. He served 4 months and 21 days on active duty. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial. DPSOS states based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records the discharge to include the RE code and separation code was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge instruction and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. DPSOS found no evidence of an error or injustice in the processing of the applicant’s discharge or that the applicant was pending a Medical Evaluation Board. The DPSOS complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial to change the RE code to an eligible RE code. DPSOA states the applicant received an erroneous RE code on his DD Form 214 of “4K”. His correct RE code is 2C (Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service); as required by AFI 36-2606, Reenlistments in the USAF, chapter 3, based on his entry level separation with an uncharacterized character of service. The RE code 2C applies to all entry level separations without characterization of service regardless whether the discharge is voluntary or involuntary. The applicant will be provided a corrected copy of his DD Form 214 with an RE code of 2C. The DPSOA complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 10 February 2012, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). 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. The applicant's complete submission was thoroughly reviewed and his contentions were duly noted. However, we do not find the applicant’s assertions and the documentation presented in support of his appeal sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPRs). However, we note AFPC/DPSOA will correct the applicant’s RE Code to 2C to appropriately reflect his entry level separation with uncharacterized service. We agree with this correction. Therefore, relief beyond that already administratively granted is not warranted _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of an 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-2011-04212 in Executive Session on 30 May 2012, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-04212 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 October 2011, w/atch. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 4 January 2012. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 23 January 2012. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 February 2012.