RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 95-00026
INDEX NUMBER: 110.00
XXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None
XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: No
_______________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
The separation authority, separation code, and reentry code on his DD
form 214 be changed to allow him reentry into the Air Force. He is
also requesting that the narrative reason for separation be changed to
reflect “Bronchitis Flare-up.”
_______________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He failed asthma testing while in basic training due to dehydration.
After treatment for bronchitis, he was never retested for asthma.
It was never proven conclusively that he had asthma.
The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_______________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
According to information contained in the applicant’s master personnel
file, he entered the Air Force on 15 Sep 94. On 3 Nov 94, he was
notified by his squadron commander that he was being recommended for
discharge from the Air Force for Erroneous Enlistment. The action was
based on the findings of a medical evaluation board (MEB) that covened
on 5 Oct 94 and found that the applicant did not meet the standards to
join the Air Force. The reason the applicant did not meet standards
was a diagnosis of asthma. The applicant acknowledged receipt on 3
Nov 94 and waived his right to consult counsel and to submit
statements. His separation was approved on 4 Nov 94 by the group
commander.
The applicant received an entry-level separation with an
uncharacterized discharge. He received a “4C” reentry code, (Failure
to meet physical standards for enlistment).
_______________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The BCMR Medical Consultant evaluated this application and recommends
that the applicant’s request be denied.
There is no doubt that the applicant’s infancy and childhood were
marked by repeated bouts of respiratory problems, as these are detailed
in records provided by the applicant in association with this appeal.
Additionally, there appears to be no doubt that he was bothered by
reactive airway disease (RAD) symptoms prior to enlistment as noted in
his statements related to military health care providers concerning use
of inhalers during periods of physical activity. To simply disregard
this medical history in favor of allowing reenlistment to the military
where environmental factors might well play a role in furthering his
underlying pulmonary tendencies would seem problematic at best, and not
to be in his or the military’s best interest. While acknowledging the
part dehydration might have played in initiating his problems at
Lackland, what assurance would he have that similar occurrences would
not play into future military duties and assignments? This reviewer
recommends against granting the relief sought by the applicant based on
the likely potential for the rigors of military training or duties to
precipitate further airway problems in this individual who has
demonstrated such propensities in the past.
The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.
The Separations Branch, AFPC/DPPRS, evaluated this application and
concurs with the recommendation of the BCMR Medical Consultant. They
also note that the applicant has not filed a timely request.
The complete evaluation is at Exhibit D.
_______________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the evaluation were forwarded to the applicant on 9 Feb 01
for review and comment within 30 days. 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 timely filed.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to
demonstrate the existence of probable 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 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
compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this
application.
4. 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 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 20 March 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
Mr. Roscoe Hinton, Jr., Member
Mr. Thomas J. Topolski, Jr., Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 6 Sep 00, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Memorandum, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated
4 Dec 00.
Exhibit D. Memorandum, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 9 Jan 01.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 9 Feb 01.
Richard A. Peterson
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01757
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01757 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), Block 28, Narrative Reason for Separation, be changed from “Erroneous Enlistment.” ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01556
Based on symptoms consistent with reactive airways disease and asthma and the positive bronchoprovocation test confirming abnormal bronchial reactivity, he underwent entry-level separation. The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant states he was sick with a bad case of bronchitis when he was tested for asthma. Exhibit C. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 17 Sep 03.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02345
The PEB recommended that he be discharged. On 31 Jul 01, the IPEB found him unfit for further military service based on a diagnosis of asthma and recommended that he be discharged with severance pay, with a compensable rating of 10%. He was diagnosed with asthma based on a clinical history consistent with the disease and positive methacholine bronchoprovocation testing.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02092
Medical standards for enlistment (and for continued service) indicate that asthma, including reactive airways disease, exercise induced bronchospasm or asthmatic bronchitis, reliably diagnosed at any age is disqualifying for enlistment. None of the other conditions documented in the applicant’s records would have entitled him to disability benefits. He states that he did not have any knee problems or hand discomfort prior to basic training.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01107
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 03-01107 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Narrative Reason for Separation on her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be changed so she may enlist in another service. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE...
If, as the applicant contends, the recruiter then had him fill out a second medical history form concealing this history of early childhood asthma, the applicant should not have been considered a fraudulent entry, but rather an erroneous entry level separation should have been the reason for his dismissal. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The Military Personnel Management Specialist, Separations Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, states that they concur with the...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03241
On 29 Aug 00, the applicant received notification that she was being recommended for discharge for erroneous enlistment. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends the application be denied. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and noting the applicant’s submission, we are unpersuaded that the requested relief should be approved.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03273
The remaining facts pertaining to the applicant’s medical issues are discussed in the advisory opinion provided by the AFBCMR Medical Consultant at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Medical Consultant recommended denial noting that during her enlistment medical examination, she completed a DD Form 2807, Report of Medical History. A complete copy of the Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-00218
________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends the application be denied. Although the applicant is presently doing well as indicated by a 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. Exhibit C. Letter, BCMR Medical...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-01635
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On his Report of Medical History, dated 15 Nov 00, the applicant indicated he did not have asthma, was not on any medications, and had no known allergies. The case was found legally sufficient and the discharge authority directed the applicant’s entry-level separation for fraudulent entry into military service. Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, dated 9 Aug 02.