RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  00-02052
            INDEX CODE:  112.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code  be  changed  so  that  he  can
attend Officer Training School (OTS) and enter active duty.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

AF Form 618 (Medical Board Report), dated August 14,  1990,  item  23A
states  Scheuermann’s  disease,  chronic  condition   which   may   be
progressive.  He does not have this disease.

In support of the appeal, applicant submits a copy of reports from his
chiropractor and his radiologist, stating that there is no  conclusive
evidence of the presence of Scheuermann’s Disease in the region of the
spine.

Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on  24  July  1990  for  a
period of 4 years.

The applicant, while  serving  in  the  grade  of  airman  basic,  was
separated from the Air Force on 21 August 1990 under the provisions of
AFR 39-10 (Failed to meet Physical Standards for Enlistment)  with  an
uncharacterized discharge.  He served 28 days total active duty.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Chief Medical Consultant, AFBCMR,  reviewed  the  application  and
states that the disease diagnosed by  military  providers  is  one  of
several manifestations of osteochondrosis, diseases presenting for the
most part in childhood and often resolving over time.  Other  examples
are known as Osgood-Schlatter affecting the lower leg bone, the tibia,
and Legg-Calve-Perthes disease affecting the head of the femur.   With
time the immediate effects of these disorders, mainly pain, are  often
relieved, and the individual goes on to lead  a  normal  life,  albeit
with frequent  residual  effects.   The  problem  for  people  in  the
military is the rigors they face in this life that are different  from
those of civilian life, and the applicant’s symptoms that led  to  the
diagnosis are  common  with  these  disorders.   AFI  48-123,  Medical
Examinations and  Standards,  Attachment  3,  paragraphs  A3.29.3  and
A3.29.11 address the disqualifying nature of such disease if there  is
residual change by x-ray or excessive  curvature  of  the  spine  that
might be aggravated by such military service.   If  the  applicant  is
desirous of seeking a waiver for this condition, then he must  provide
thorough evidence of  complete  lack  of  such  residual  effects,  in
keeping with these medical standards for enlistment, something he  has
not  provided  with  the  current   application.    He   should   seek
consultation with a military recruiter  who  can  provide  details  of
standards  he  needs  to  meet  in  this  regard.   The  BCMR  Medical
Consultant is of  the  opinion  that  no  change  in  the  records  is
warranted at this time, and the application should be denied.

A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

The Military Personnel Management Specialist, AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed the
application and states  that  they  concur  with  the  AFBCMR  Medical
Consultant’s recommendation that his records should not be changed for
the reason given.

A complete copy of their evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.

The Chief, Special Activities, AFPC/DPPAES, reviewed  the  application
and states  that  the  Reenlistment  Eligibility  (RE)  code  “4C”  is
correct.  The type of separation drove assignment of the RE code.

A complete copy of their evaluation is attached at Exhibit E.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant submitted  an  additional  diagnosis  from  his  orthopaedic
surgeon who states that they believe this diagnosis is  incorrect  and
this patient has absolutely no obvious abnormalities.

Applicant's letter, with attachment, is attached at Exhibit G.

________________________________________________________________




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 probable error or  injustice.   After  reviewing  the
evidence of record, we are not persuaded that the applicant’s  records
are in error or that he has been the  victim  of  an  injustice.   His
contentions are noted; however, in our opinion, the detailed  comments
provided by the appropriate Air Force offices adequately address those
allegations.  Therefore, we agree with opinions and recommendations of
the Air  Force  and  adopt  their  rationale  as  the  basis  for  the
conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an  error  or
injustice.  In the absence of evidence to the  contrary,  we  find  no
compelling 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 probable  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  in
Executive Session on 14 December 2000, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:

                       Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Panel Chair
                       Mr. Joseph A. Roj, Member
                       Ms. Patricia D. Vestal, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 15 Aug 00, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 11 Sep 00.
      Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 28 Sep 00.





      Exhibit E. Letter, AFPC/DPPAES, dated 5 Oct 00
      Exhibit F. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 27 Oct 00.
      Exhibit G. Applicant’s Response, undated, w/atch.




                             THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                             Panel Chair