RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03961 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her narrative reason for separation of “Failed Medical/Physical Procurement Standards” be changed to show that her discharge was charged due to a service connected disability. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: A Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) hearing in 2003, determined that her discharge in 2001 was due to a service connected disability (asthma). The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 25 May 01, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force. In a letter dated 15 Jun 01, the applicant’s commander notified her that he was recommending her discharge from the Air Force under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, Chapter 5, Section C, Defective Enlistments, Paragraph 5.14 for Erroneous Enlistment. The specific reason for this action was the applicant did not meet minimum medical standards to enlist due to being diagnosed with asthma. On 15 Jun 01, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the action, and waived her right to consult with legal counsel or submit statements in her own behalf. On 19 Jun 01, the discharge authority approved the applicant’s Erroneous Discharge with an entry-level separation. On 21 Jun 01, the applicant received an entry-level separation with uncharacterized service with a narrative reason for separation of “Failed Medical/Physical Procurement Standards.” In accordance with Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-3208, Attachment A3.5, Airmen are given entry-level separation with uncharacterized service when separation is initiated in the first 180 days of continuous active service. The Department of Defense (DoD) determined it would be unfair to the member and the service to characterize a member’s limited service when separation is initiated within the first 180 days of active service. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AETC/SGPS recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. Based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge, to include the narrative reason for separation was appropriately administered and within the discretion of the discharge authority. The applicant has not provided any evidence of an error or injustice to warrant the requested change to her narrative reason for separation. Additionally, a pulmonary function test confirmed the applicant’s asthma existed prior to service and she failed to disclose this on her entry exam. Asthma is not a condition that is caused by military service in a 27 day timeframe. The complete SGPS 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 Jun 15 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). 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. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2014-03961 in Executive Session on 3 Sep 15 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 23 Sep 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AETC/SGPS, dated 9 Jun 15. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Jun 15.