RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-03087
                       INDEX CODE:  110.00
                       COUNSEL:  NONE

                       HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  11 APRIL 2007

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code “4C” be changed to allow him to
reenter military service.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He believes he should be given a second chance to serve  his  country.
He further believes the mistakes he may have made should not keep  him
from reentering military service.  He understands  why  his  discharge
papers have the RE code “4C.”  He gave false information concerning  a
medical condition when he entered in the Air Force.   However,  he  no
longer suffers from migraine headaches.  He also did not  disclose  an
incident involving the law upon entering the Air Force.  He was  under
the impression that once he  completed  the  probationary  period  and
community service his record was expunged.  He was  counseled  by  the
court not to disclose this information due to the fact his record  was
cleared of the incident.

In support of his request, the  applicant  provided  a  statement  and
character letters.

Applicant's complete submission,  with  attachments,  is  attached  at
Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force  (RegAF)  on  2 August
1995, as an airman basic (AB) for a period of four years.

During Basic Military Training (BMT) the applicant was referred to the
mental health clinic.   The  applicant  was  expressing  distress  and
depression regarding entering the Air Force and
stated he wanted to go home.   During  the  evaluation  the  applicant
disclosed that for a year prior to entering the Air Force he had  been
feeling down and unhappy with himself and that he  had  a  pre-service
history of migraine  headaches  (not  reported  at  the  time  of  the
enlistment medical examination) that  have  continued  since  entering
BMT.   He  further  disclosed  a  pre-service  civilian   arrest   and
conviction as a juvenile (not reported at  the  time  of  enlistment).
The evaluation  which  included  psychological  testing,  concluded  a
diagnosis  of  Adjustment  Disorder  with  Depressed  Mood,   with   a
recommended  disqualification  for  weapons  handling  and   Personnel
Reliability Program (PRP) duties, but did not recommend administrative
discharge at this time.

On 15 August 1995, the applicant presented to the  clinic  complaining
of headaches and reported his history of pre-service  headaches.   The
evaluation  noted  that   the   applicant’s   headaches   were   often
precipitated by stress and in the short time since  beginning  BMT  he
had experienced two migraine headaches which were unresponsive to over-
the-counter medications.

On 17 August 1995, the Neurology evaluation diagnosed classic migraine
headache  existing  prior  to  service  that  was  disqualifying   for
enlistment and recommended administrative separation.

The Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) narrative summary  dated  22 August
1995, also noted an Adjustment Disorder.  On 23 August 1995,  the  MEB
reviewed  the  clinical  evidence   and   recommended   administrative
separation for migraine headaches interfering with  training,  existed
prior to service without permanent service aggravation.

On 28 August 1995, the  applicant  was  notified  of  his  commander’s
intent to recommend him for an entry-level  separation  for  erroneous
enlistment for the following reason:

            On 23 August 1995, a MEB found the applicant did not  meet
minimum medical standards to join the Air Force.  The applicant should
not have been allowed to join the Air Force due to migraine  headaches
that interfered with training.

The commander advised the applicant of his right  to  consult  legal
counsel, and if he so desired an  appointment  would  be  made  upon
request, and to submit statements in his own behalf.  He was advised
that failure to consult with  counsel  or  submit  statements  could
constitute his waiver of his rights to do so.

The applicant waived his right to consult counsel and  to  submit  a
statement.  He also acknowledged if he was discharged he  would  not
be eligible for a disability retirement or severance pay.

On 29 August 1995, the discharge authority approved the  applicant’s
discharge with an entry-level separation.

The  applicant  was  separated  with  an  uncharacterized  entry-level
separation on 31 August 1995 under  the  provisions  of  AFI  36-3208,
Failed Medical/Physical Procurement Standards, in the grade of  airman
basic and issued an RE code of  “4C,”  Separated  for  concealment  of
juvenile records, minority, failure to  meet  physical  standards  for
enlistment, failure to attain a 9.0 reading grade level as measured by
the Air Force Reading Abilities Test  (AFRAT),  or  void  enlistments,
under this condition the applicant is ineligible to  reenlist  in  the
Air Force.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The AFBCMR Medical  Consultant  recommends  the  requested  relief  be
denied.   An  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 as well as physical complaints such as headaches.   One  of
the key features of an Adjustment Disorder is the  condition  resolves
with relief of the  stressors.   Individuals  who  develop  Adjustment
Disorder due to the stress of the 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.  In the applicant’s case, although mental health  providers
did not make a recommendation for  administrative  separation,  it  is
clear from the  records  that  his  symptoms  of  Adjustment  Disorder
prevented  him  from  training  and  his  headaches  were  a   further
manifestation of his inability to cope with stress.

The fact the applicant  is  doing  well  at  this  time  confirms  his
diagnosis of Adjustment Disorder; however it does not predict 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 demonstrated  inability  to
cope with BMT, even though several years  ago,  is  indicative  of  an
unacceptable risk for recurrence of symptoms  of  Adjustment  Disorder
and headache in response to the rigors of military service.

A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 6
October 2006, for review and response.  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 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 the applicant has  been
the victim of an error  or  injustice.   After  undergoing  a  medical
evaluation, the applicant was diagnosed with migraine headaches and an
Adjustment Disorder. He was  administratively  discharged  for  failed
medical/physical procurement standards due to migraines which  existed
prior to service that interfered with training.  The applicant appears
to be doing well and states  he  no  longer  suffers  from  migraines.
However we do not find his assertions sufficient to conclude  that  he
should be allowed to reenter military  service.   The  fact  that  the
applicant  appears  to  be  doing  well  supports  his  diagnosis   of
Adjustment Disorder.  A key feature of an Adjustment Disorder is  that
the condition resolves with relief of the stressors.  However, it does
not predict if he reenters military service that he would respond well
to the stressors and rigors of an military environment.  At  the  time
members are separated from the Air Force, they  are  furnished  an  RE
code predicated upon the quality of their service and circumstances of
their separation.  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  appropriate
directives.  We further note the applicant’s reenlistment  eligibility
code “4C” is a waiverable code and if he wishes  to  reenter  military
service, the respective service may waive the RE code  depending  upon
the recruiting needs of the service at the time.  Therefore,  in  view
of the above, we find no compelling basis to  recommend  granting  the
relief sought in this application.

_________________________________________________________________

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-
2005-03087  in  Executive  Session  on  29  November  2006  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                       Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
                       Ms. Janet I. Hassan, Member
                       Mr. Richard K. Hartley, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket  Number
BC-2005-02087 was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 5 Oct 05, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, dated
                       27 Sep 06.
      Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Oct 06.




                             MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
                             Panel Chair