RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  2003-00357
		INDEX CODE:  110.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her entry-level separation be changed to a medical discharge.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She was separated from the Air Force due to asthma.  

In support of her appeal, the applicant provided a copy of a Chronological Record of Medical Care, dated 3 January 2003 and other documentation.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 17 December 2002, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force in the grade of airman basic for a period of six years.

Medical records reveal that on 18 December 2002, during basic training, she complained of chest pain.  Subsequent evaluation, including exercise stress testing by cardiology on 20 December 2002, did not disclose a clear cause for her chest pain and she was initially diagnosed with musculoskeletal chest wall pain.  

On 28 December 2002 she presented to the clinic complaining of shortness of breath and chest pressure beginning when she arrived for basic training.  The physician’s note indicates that the patient stated she has had “intermittent shortness of breath for years, mostly with exercise, but also at rest,” and an “unproductive cough with activity.”  A family history of asthma in her father and brother was indicated on the clinical note.  The applicant underwent histamine bronchoprovocation testing on 3 January 2003 at which time it was determined she had mild intermittent asthma.

On 6 January 2003, the applicant was notified of her commander’s intent to initiate discharge action against her for erroneous enlistment under AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-3208, Chapter 5, Section C, Defective Enlistments, Paragraph 5.14.

The commander indicated in his recommendation for discharge action that he received a medical narrative summary dated 3 January 2003 that found the applicant did not meet minimum medical standards to enlist.  She should not have been allowed to join the Air Force because of asthma.  The commander did not ask the Air Force to give her a disability separation because the medical staff found her unqualified.

The commander advised the applicant of her right to consult legal counsel and submit statements in her own behalf; or waive the above rights after consulting with counsel.

On 6 January 2003, the applicant waived her right to consult counsel and to submit statements in her own behalf.

On 7 January 2003, the discharge authority approved the applicant’s entry-level separation.

On 7 January 2003, the applicant was separated with an entry-level separation in the grade of airman basic, under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Failed Medical/Physical Procurement Standards).  She served 21 days of total active service.  She received 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).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommended denial.  He indicated that the applicant was diagnosed with asthma that existed prior to service.  She did not have a diagnosis of asthma before entering the service and her lung exam was normal, her positive bronchoprovocation test is very specific for diagnosing asthma and reactive airways disease that is disqualifying for military service.  The applicant’s asthma based on accepted medical principles existed prior to service (EPTS).  Signs of symptoms of chronic disease identified so soon after the day of entry on military service that the disease could not have originated in that short a period of time will be accepted as proof that the disease manifested prior to entrance into active military service.  In this case, asthma is a chronic disease that could not have originated in the short time the applicant was on active duty.  Further she reported a history of symptoms prior to entering service, use of asthma medications after the age of 12 and had a strong family history of asthma.  Action and disposition in this case are proper and equitable reflecting compliance with Air Force directives that implement the law.

The evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial.  They indicated that based upon the documentation in the file, they believe the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  Additionally, the discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority.  The BCMR Medical Consultant discusses the medical aspects of this case and is of the opinion that no change in the records is warranted.  Her uncharacterized character of service is correct and in accordance with Department of Defense and Air Force instructions.

The evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 9 May 2003, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days.  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.  After reviewing the evidence of record, we are convinced that the applicant’s separation from the Air Force was in accordance with the prevailing regulation.  Her contention that she should have been medically discharged due to asthma is noted; however, in our opinion, the detailed comments provided by the AFBCMR Chief Medical Consultant adequately address these allegations.  Therefore, we are in agreement with the comments and recommendation of the Chief Medical Consultant and adopt his rationale as the basis for our decision that the applicant has not been the victim of either an error or injustice.  In view of the above and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis upon which to recommend favorable action on this application.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of an error or an 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-2003-00357 in Executive Session on 10 July 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

			Panel Chair
			Member
			Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 27 January 2003, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, 
			 dated 8 April 2003.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 1 May 2003.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 May 2003.

				
				Panel Chair