RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2002-03241
		INDEX CODE:  110.00, 100.03

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2C be changed to allow eligibility to reenlist in the Air Force.  It appears that she would also like her narrative reason for separation changed.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She had not done any hard running prior to entering the Air Force so naturally, when she began training, she was having problems.  She overcame those problems and passed the physical fitness part of basic training.  After three weeks into technical school, without any form of exercise, PT started with a run.  She began to have trouble breathing with tightness in her chest near the end of the “smoking session.”  She was ultimately diagnosed with asthma.  Following her separation, she went to see her primary care physician, who did the same test that the military ran, and was diagnosed as non-asthmatic.

In support of her request, applicant submits a personal letter and a copy of Standard Form 600, Chronological Record of Medical Care, dated 21 Aug 00.  The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant contracted her enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 24 May 00 for a period of 6 years.

On 29 Aug 00, the applicant received notification that she was being recommended for discharge for erroneous enlistment.  The reason for this action was due to the applicant being diagnosed with asthma, existing prior to service.  The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification and waived her option to consult counsel and declined to submit statements in her behalf.  On 31 Aug 00, the discharge authority approved the recommended separation and directed that the applicant be issued an entry level separation.  She received an uncharacterized entry level separation on 6 Sep 00 under the provisions of AFI 36‑3208 (erroneous entry).  She had completed a total of 3 months and 13 days and was serving in the grade of airman basic (E-1) at the time of separation.  She received an RE Code of 2C, which defined means "Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or, entry level separation without characterization of service."
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends the application be denied.  The AFBCMR Medical Consultant states that, on 16 Aug 00, the applicant reported to the clinic complaining of wheezing, especially when running, associated with chest tightness.  Because her symptoms were consistent with asthma, she was referred for evaluation by the Wilford Hall Medical Center Allergy - Immunology Department.  On her 18 Aug 00 allergy evaluation, the applicant reported shortness of breath with wheezing and chest tightness with 5 minutes of exertion.  She underwent histamine bronchoprovocation testing which was positive for reactive airways disease consistent with a diagnosis of moderate asthma.  Following the applicant’s 24 Aug 00 visit to the clinic complaining of feeling depressed and having thoughts about suicide, she was diagnosed with adjustment disorder.  The AFBCMR Medical Consultant indicates that the applicant was diagnosed with two conditions disqualifying for military service, asthma and adjustment disorder.  Although the applicant may not have had asthma in the strictest definition before entering the military, she clearly demonstrated symptoms of exercise induced asthma during her presumptive period that rendered her unfit for duty.  Histamine bronchoprovocation testing confirmed the diagnosis of asthma.  The applicant’s experience during training and her positive bronchoprovocation test indicate that she is at considerably higher risk for recurrent problems when subjected to the rigors of military operational environments.  Action and disposition in this case are proper and equitable reflecting compliance with Air Force directives that implement the law.  The AFBCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C.

HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied.  Based upon the documentation in the file, DPPRS believes the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  DPPRS states that airmen are given entry level separation/uncharacterized service characterization when separation is initiated in the first 180 days of continuous active service.  An entry-level/uncharacterized separation should not be viewed as negative and should not be confused with other types of separation.  The HQ AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D.

HQ AFPC/DPPAE recommends the application be denial.  DPPAE states that the applicant’s RE Code of 2C is correct.  The HQ AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit E.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

The applicant reviewed the advisory opinions and indicated she was not told that she had an adjustment disorder.  This so-called adjustment disorder occurred immediately after being told that she was being separated from the Air Force.  She provided additional information on asthma and histamine challenges.  In her opinion, she was suffering from hay fever that caused her to have some asthma symptoms.  After reading the researched articles, she feels she has been wrongfully separated due to improper testing and because she was wrongfully diagnosed with asthma.  She has not had any problems with breathing since returning home.  The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit G.
_________________________________________________________________

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.  After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and noting the applicant’s submission, we are unpersuaded that the requested relief should be approved.  In this respect, we noted that the applicant was diagnosed with moderate asthma and an adjustment disorder, conditions that are disqualifying for military service.  Applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, we found no persuasive evidence that responsible officials applied inappropriate standards in effecting the applicant’s discharge, that pertinent Air Force instructions were violated or that the applicant was not afforded all the rights to which entitled at the time of separation.  We therefore agree with the opinions and recommendations of the appropriate Air Force offices and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain her burden that she has suffered either an error or an injustice.  In view of the above and absent persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.
_________________________________________________________________

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 this application in Executive Session on 27 Mar 03, under the provisions of AFI 36‑2603:
The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2002-03241.

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 4 Oct 02, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 18 Dec 02.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 10 Jan 03.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAE, dated 10 Feb 03.
   Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Feb 03.
   Exhibit G.  Letter from Applicant, dated 5 Mar 03, w/atchs.