RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04908 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Item 28, Narrative Reason for Separation, on her DD Form 214, Certificate of Discharge or Release from Active Duty, be changed from “erroneous entry – other” to “medical discharge - asthma.” ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 1. She was medically discharged from the Air Force after medical clearance testing for her permanent change of assignment (PCS) to Okinawa Air Base (AB) Japan revealed she had asthma. 2. She was two weeks away from purchasing her first home when she became aware that her DD Form 214 did not state that she was medically discharged. It must be changed in order for her Department Veterans Affairs (DVA) home loan to be approved. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: 1. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 11 March 2003. 2. On 4 June 2003 the applicant was notified by her commander that he was recommending her for discharge from the Air Force under the provisions of AFPD 36-32 Military Retirements and Separations and AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, Chapter 5, Section 5C, Defective Enlistments, paragraph 5.14, Discharge for Erroneous Enlistment. The specific reason for this action was: the Chronological Record of Medical Care, dated 19 May 2003, indicated that the applicant was diagnosed with Asthma. It was determined that this condition existed prior to service and had not been permanently aggravated by service. 3. On 4 June 2003, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge and was advised of her right to consult counsel and submit a statement to the commander for consideration. She waived her option to consult counsel and her right to submit a statement for consideration. 4. Subsequent to the file being found legally sufficient the discharge authority approved the recommendation and directed the applicant be separated with an entry level separation. The applicant was discharged on 16 June 2003, and was credited with 3 months and 6 days of active duty service. 5. On 8 January 2013, the applicant contacted the offices of her State Representative to Congress and requested assistance in pursuing the change of her DD Form 214. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 1. AETC/SGPS recommends denial. SGPS states that based on the documentation on file in the applicant’s records, they find the diagnoses made and the separation process was accomplished in accordance with established policy and administrative procedures. 2. They noted, from a review of the applicant’s records and medical notes from the Wilford Hall Medical Center (WHMC), that on 16 May 2003 she was seen at the clinic stating she had shortness of breath (SOB) when she slept flat, and sleeps on 4 pillows. They also observed she had a positive family history of asthma. The applicant had a severe SOB episode on 15 May 2003 while walking to class, and had to be transported by ambulance to WHMC. She did not require any treatment on this occurrence, but was administered a histamine challenge test noting a positive result with a 38% change in FEV-1 at 2 mg of histamine. She was diagnosed with asthma, which is disqualifying for military service. She was prescribed Albuterol 2-4 puffs as needed and Flovent, 2 puffs twice a day. Based on the diagnosis she was processed for an entry level separation. The complete AETC/SGPS evaluation is at Exhibit C. 1. AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial. DPSOR states that based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. 2. Although they are pleased that the applicant is apparently succeeding and coping well in her civilian capacity, it does not change the basis for which she was discharged from the Air Force. The military environment is unique and stressors encountered in such an environment may not appear or surface when removed from the military environment. The applicant should not have been allowed to join the Air Force because of asthma. Had the Air Force known of this condition at the time of the applicant's enlistment, she would not have been allowed entry into the military. 3. The applicant's service characterization is correct as reflected on her DD Form 214. Airmen are given Entry-level Separation/Uncharacterized service characterization when separation is initiated in the first 180 days of continuous active service. The Department of Defense (DoD) determined if a member served less than 180 days continuous active service, it would be unfair to the member and the service to characterize their limited service. Therefore, the narrative reason for separation and the uncharacterized character of service on her DD Form 214 is correct and in accordance with DoD and Air Force instructions. The complete AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 21 January 2013 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). To date, a response has not been received. ________________________________________________________________ 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 Air Force offices or primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. 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 this application BC-2012-04908 in Executive Session on 11 July 2013, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 18 October 2012, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AETC/SGPS, dated 7 January 2013. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 10 January 2013 Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 January 2013. Dear: Reference your application submitted under the provisions of AFI 36-2603 (Section 1552, 10 USC), AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-04908. After careful consideration of your application and military records, the Board determined that the evidence you presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice. Accordingly, the Board denied your application. You have the right to submit newly discovered relevant evidence for consideration by the Board. In the absence of such additional evidence, a further review of your application is not possible. BY DIRECTION OF THE PANEL CHAIR Attachment: Record of Board Proceedings