ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01107
		INDEX CODE:  110.02
		COUNSEL:  None

		HEARING DESIRED: YES

_______________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

By amendment at Exhibit K, the applicant requests her Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed to “Secretarial Authority” and she be given a medical disability retirement. 

_______________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 7 December 2001, during a medical consultation by the Department of Allergy/Immunology, the attending physician made an assessment that the applicant’s asthma was exercise induced.  On 10 December 2001, the applicant was placed on Temporary Duty Restriction and prescribed an inhaler.  On 18 December 2001, the discharge authority directed that the applicant be discharged from the Air Force with an entry-level separation.  Accordingly, applicant was discharged on 20 December 2001 by reason of “Failed Medical/Physical Procurement Standards” with a Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of “4C.”  She had served 25 days on active duty.

On 29 October 2003, the Board considered the applicant’s request to have her narrative reason for separation on her DD Form 214 changed so she could enlist in another branch of the service.  The Board determined that the applicant should be medically evaluated before it rendered a decision regarding the applicant’s request.  It was directed that the applicant be issued invitational travel orders to Wilford Hall Medical Center for the purpose of undergoing a physical examination to determine her fitness for reentry into military service and that the results be forwarded to the Board for a final determination on her request (See Exhibit G.)

_______________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 21 January 2004, the applicant underwent a physical examination at Wilford Hall Medical Center.  The examining physician's assessment stated "histamine challenge with borderline result, but by our official standards, does not meet criteria for bronchial hyperresponsiveness.  The history obtained from patient on this visit is slightly different than that obtained on prior evaluation.  Based on her current history of never having had any wheezing, chest tightness or dyspnea, and today's result on her histamine challenge test, we would say that it does not appear that she has asthma at this time" (See Exhibit H).

On 13 April 2004, the BCMR Medical Consultant reviewed the physical examination results and stated that because her recent histamine bronchoprovocation test was “borderline,” the fact remains the applicant experienced symptoms suggestive of asthma including shortness of breath, chest pain and tightness, and cough with running, marching and walking that interfered with participation in training.  The BCMR Medical Consultant is of the opinion that the Board may consider a favorable decision understanding the potential risk for recurrent problems that still remains (See Exhibit I).

_______________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 12 February 2004 and 22 April 2004, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was sent to the applicant for review and comment.  (Exhibit J).

On 27 February 2004, applicant responded by stating that since her asthma tests at Lackland AFB were officially negative she would like to now ask for back pay, medical and base privileges and housing allowance.  (Exhibit K).

On 6 May 2004, applicant stated she no longer wanted to enlist and would like her RE code changed, obtain any and all benefits and pay since being separated and be awarded a disability rating if possible.  On 19 May 2004, applicant reiterated that she no longer wanted to reenlist in the Air Force and would like her RE code changed to secretarial authority and would like to be awarded a medical disability retirement.  (Exhibit K).

_______________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.  After careful review of the applicant’s submission, we found no evidence to indicate her discharge from the Air Force was inappropriate or unjust.  Applicant contends that the original asthma diagnosis performed by the Lackland clinic and Wilford Hall was based on incomplete information and the exam conducted by an allergy specialist after her discharge, found she had no traces of asthma.  However, we do not find these arguments, in and of themselves, sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale expressed by the BCMR Medical Consultant.  Although the applicant is presently doing well as indicated by the recent allergy evaluation, the record clearly shows she was experiencing physical problems while in training and her symptoms, suggestive of asthma or reactive airways disease, required her separation from the Air Force at that time.  Therefore, we agree with the findings and recommendation of the BCMR Medical Consultant and adopt his rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  Therefore, she is not entitled to receive a medical separation from the Air Force.

2.  Notwithstanding the above determination, we believe that based on the overall evidence of record which includes the recent medical evaluation findings, which indicate she no longer exhibits asthma type symptoms, we believe the applicant’s reason for separation and RE Code should be changed to provide her an opportunity to enlist, if she so desires.  The relief that we recommend will in no way guarantee that the applicant will be accepted for military service, only that she will not be excluded from applying.  Therefore, we recommend the applicant’s records be corrected as indicated below.  

3.  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 issues involved.  Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

_______________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 20 December 2001, she was separated with an uncharacterized entry level separation under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 by reason of “Secretarial Authority,” with a separation code of “JFF” and issued a Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of “3K.”

_______________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered Docket Number 03-01107 in Executive Session on 21 April 2004 and 19 November 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

All members voted to correct the records, as recommended.  The following documentary evidence was considered for AFBCMR Docket Number 2003-01107:

     Exhibit G.  Record of Proceedings, dated 29 Oct 03,
                 w/atchs.
     Exhibit H.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 28 Jan 04.
     Exhibit I.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, 
                 Dated 13 Apr 04.
     Exhibit J.  Letters, AFBCMR, dated 12 Feb 04 and 
                 22 Apr 04.
     Exhibit K.  Letters, Applicant, dated 27 Feb 04, 
                 6 May 04 and 19 May 04. 

                                   
                                   Panel Chair

AFBCMR 02-01053

MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

	Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that:

	The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to XXXXX, be corrected to show that on 20 December 2001, she was separated with an uncharacterized entry level separation under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 by reason of “Secretarial Authority,” with a separation code of “JFF” and issued a Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of “3K.”

		
		Director
		Air Force Review Boards Agency