RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01720 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His reenlistment (RE) code of 2Q (personnel medically retired or 
discharged) be changed. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He is able to serve in the Air Force or any other willing 
branch. 

 

He had surgery to remove his tonsils and has been able to 
exercise with no further problems. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides two letters 
from his physicians. 

 

The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit A. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant entered the Regular Air Force on 9 Mar 04. 

 

On 5 Jun 08, the applicant was referred to the Informal Physical 
Evaluation Board for moderate persistent asthma. The IPEB 
recommended that he be discharged Under Other Than Title 10, 
Chapter 61, for a condition which existed prior to service 
(EPTS). On 12 Jun 08, the applicant non-concurred with the 
findings and requested a formal hearing with counsel. On 29 Jul 
08, the Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB) reviewed the 
case and noted, “member required use of his inhaler twice a day 
routinely to meet duty requirements; however, member testified 
that he stopped using his Albuterol inhaler three-four months 
ago, but the medical record does not corroborate this 
testimony.” 

 

On 29 Jul 08, the FPEB concurred with the IPEB findings and 
recommendations. On 21 Aug 08, the applicant non-concurred with 
the FPEB findings and recommendation and requested that his case 


be reviewed by the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council 
(SAFPC). 

 

On 23 Sep 08, SAFPC directed the applicant’s discharge and 
noted, “Considering that the member was allowed to enlist only 
with a waiver, that his symptoms recurred soon after entry, and 
that his sensitivity to dust and pollen will limit his 
deployment and assignment options, the Board determined that it 
was not a reasonable risk to allow him to continue on active 
duty.” Further, “…the findings that the condition was not in 
the line of duty and that it existed prior to service and was 
not aggravated by service.” 

 

The applicant was discharged on 19 Nov 08, with an honorable 
discharge and with the narrative reason for separation of 
“disability existed prior to service.” He is credited with 
4 years, 8 months, and 11 days of active military service. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

HQ AFPC/DPSD recommends denial. DPSD states the preponderance 
of evidence reflects that no error or injustice occurred during 
the disability process or at the time of separation. 

 

The complete HQ AFPC/DPSD evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

HQ AQFPC/DPSOA recommends denial. DPSOA states the applicant’s 
RE code is based on the SAFPC directed discharge for a physical 
disability that existed prior to service. 

 

The complete HQ AFPC/DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the 
applicant on 6 Aug 10 for review and comment within 30 days (E). 
As of this date, this office has not received a response. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 error or injustice. We took notice 


of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of 
the case; however, we agree with the opinions and 
recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary 
responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our 
conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or 
injustice. Further, we note the applicant has failed to provide 
test results, i.e., Methacholine Challenge Test, showing he does 
not have asthma, or other sufficient medical documentation for 
review by the BCMR Medical Consultant. Therefore, in the absence 
of evidence to the contrary, we find no 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 Docket Number 
BC-2010-01720 in Executive Session on 7 December 2010, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 


The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 30 Apr 10, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSD, dated 15 Jun 10. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSOA, dated 16 Jul 10 

 Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Aug 10.