RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-00107
            INDEX CODE:  110.02

      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  NONE

      XXXXXXX    HEARING DESIRED: YES


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  11 JUL 2006


___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 4C (separated  -  failure
to meet physical standards for enlistment…), issued in  conjunction
with his uncharacterized discharge, be changed to an RE code of 3K.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

It is medically documented that he has  no  symptoms  of  Irritable
Bowel  Syndrome  (IBS).   He  recently  met   all   the   necessary
qualifications to obtain an RE waiver, only  to  be  told  that  he
needs an RE code of “3K.”

His diagnosis of “Probable Irritable Bowel Syndrome” is incorrect.

In  support  of  his  appeal,  applicant  submitted  a  letter   of
recommendation, dated 7 Oct 04; copies of  a  physical  examination
from his civilian  physician,  his  summary  of  events  for  prior
enlistment, and a copy of his birth certificate.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on  31  May  95  for  a
period of four years.

On 12 Jul  95,  the  squadron  commander  initiated  administrative
discharge action against the applicant  for  erroneous  enlistment.
The reason for the proposed action was that  a  medical  evaluation
board found that the applicant did not  meet  the  minimum  medical
standards to join the Air Force.  The  applicant  should  not  have
been allowed to  enlist  in  the  Air  Force  because  of  probable
irritable bowel syndrome, interfering with training.  The commander
recommended the applicant be given an entry-level  separation.   On
that same date, applicant acknowledged  receipt  of  the  discharge
notification.  He waived his right to consult counsel and to submit
statements  in  his  own  behalf.    He   also   acknowledged   his
understanding of the reasons for his discharge, and that  he  would
not be entitled to any disability, retirement,  or  severance  pay.
On that same date, the discharge authority approved the entry-level
separation with service uncharacterized.

The applicant received an uncharacterized entry-level separation on
17 Jul  95,  by  reason  of  “failed  medical/physical  procurement
standards,” and was issued an RE code of 4C.  He was credited  with
1 month and 17 days of active duty service.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The  AFBCMR  Medical  Consultant  states  that  the  applicant  was
administratively discharged  with  an  entry  level  separation  on
17 Jul 95 for failed medical/physical procurement  standards  after
1 month and 17 days on active duty.  He now requests  a  change  of
his reenlistment code  so  that  he  may  reenlist  contending  the
diagnosis was in error or the problem has resolved.

Applicant began basic military training (BMT) and after  completing
one week of training, was hospitalized 6 - 12 Jun 95 for  abdominal
pain for which no cause could be found  after  appropriate  medical
evaluation.  He was returned to training status on  15 Jun 95.   On
16 Jun 95, he presented for recurrent abdominal pain and was  again
hospitalized until 22 Jun 95.  Hospital evaluation again  disclosed
no medical cause for his pain and his physicians felt his abdominal
pain was physical manifestation of his response to stress, probably
the syndrome called  irritable  bowel  syndrome.   Because  of  the
recurring nature of  psychological  stress-induced  abdominal  pain
interfering with training, he was removed from training and  placed
in the medical hold squadron for medical evaluation board.

While awaiting completion of this process, he was  referred  for  a
mental health  consultation.   The  report  rendered  diagnoses  of
adjustment disorder with depressed mood and  Psychological  Factors
Affecting  Medical  Condition.   The   medical   evaluation   board
concluded his symptoms of probable irritable  bowel  syndrome  were
due to his underlying coping skills and stress  responses  and  did
not merit disability discharge.

Irritable Bowel  Syndrome  (IBS)  is  a  gastrointestinal  syndrome
characterized by chronic abdominal pain, altered bowel  habits  and
other gastrointestinal symptoms in the absence of  any  disease  or
organic cause.  Severity of symptoms varies widely from  individual
to individual  affected  by  the  condition  and  emotional  stress
frequently  exacerbates  the  symptoms.   He  denies   experiencing
symptoms since shortly after his discharge  casting  doubt  on  the
diagnosis.  A normal physical examination and laboratory results do
not exclude this diagnosis and in fact are required to be normal in
order to render this diagnosis.

Adjustment Disorder with Depressed Mood results  from  identifiable
stressors  that  overcome  the  individual’s   ability   to   cope.
Adjustment  Disorder  is  characterized  by  marked   psychological
distress in response to identifiable stressors  that  overcome  the
individual’s ability to cope  and  is  frequently  associated  with
significant impairment in social and occupational functioning.  The
emotional and behavioral responses may be in excess of  what  would
normally  be  expected  given  the   nature   of   the   stressors.
Manifestations   can   include   depressed   mood,   anxiety,   and
disturbances of conduct.  Some individuals  may  express  emotional
distress as physical complaints such as headaches,  abdominal  pain
or back pain.  Psychological testing indicated  the  applicant  had
the  tendency  to  manifest  psychological  distress  as   physical
symptoms.  One of the key features of Adjustment Disorder  is  that
the condition resolves  with  relief  of  the  stressors  and  this
appears to be the case for the applicant.  Individuals who  develop
Adjustment Disorder due to the stress of routine rigors of military
service with or without concomitant personal issues are not  suited
for military service and are subject to administrative discharge by
their commander.  At the time of the mental health evaluation,  the
applicant was already pending  discharge  for  his  abdominal  pain
however evidence  of  the  record  indicates  that  his  Adjustment
Disorder was of sufficient severity to  warrant  discharge  on  the
basis of unsuitability.

The fact that he is functioning well at this time at home  confirms
his diagnosis of adjustment disorder and  stress-induced  abdominal
pain interfering with training, however it does not predict that he
will  respond  well  to  the  stresses  of   military   operations,
deployment, or combat  when  he  is  separated  from  his  familiar
surroundings and usual support system of family and  friends.   His
past experience, even 10 years  previously,  is  predictive  of  an
increased risk for recurrence of  symptoms  if  re-exposed  to  the
rigors of military training and service.  Action and disposition in
this case are proper and equitable reflecting compliance  with  Air
Force directives that implement the law.  It is his opinion that no
change in the records is warranted.

A complete copy of the 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 May 05 for review and comment within 30  days.   As  of  this
date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D).

___________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided  by  existing
law or regulations.

2.  The application was not timely filed; however,  it  is  in  the
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

3.  Insufficient  relevant   evidence   has   been   presented   to
demonstrate the existence of an error  or  injustice.   Applicant’s
contentions are duly noted; however, we are not persuaded  that  he
has been the victim of an error or injustice.  At the time  members
are separated from the Air Force, they are  furnished  an  RE  code
predicated upon the quality of their service and the  circumstances
of their separation.  Applicant’s RE code of 4C accurately reflects
that he failed to meet  physical  standards  for  enlistment.   The
applicant’s case has undergone an exhaustive  review  by  the  BCMR
Medical Consultant and we find nothing in the evidence provided  by
the applicant that would  overcome  his  assessment  of  the  case.
After a thorough review of the evidence of record, we believe  that
given the circumstances surrounding the applicant’s separation, the
RE code issued was in accordance  with  the  governing  directives.
Therefore, in the absence of persuasive evidence to  the  contrary,
we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought
in this application.

4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and  it  has  not
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel  will
materially  add  to  our  understanding  of  the  issue   involved.
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

___________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of 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 AFBCMR Docket  Number
BC-2005-00107 in Executive Session  on  23  June  2005,  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
      Ms. Martha A. Maust, Member
      Mr. Michael V. Barbino, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 3 Jan 05, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, dated 17 May 05.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 May 05.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Chair