Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-01635
Original file (BC-2002-01635.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBERS:  02-01635
            INDEX CODE 110.02  100.06
            COUNSEL:  None

            HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The narrative reason for his discharge be changed.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His enlistment was not fraudulent because he does not have asthma  and
did not lie about anything. He had  bronchitis  during  training,  not
asthma. When he was 8 years old and had pneumonia, he used an  inhaler
a few times.  He provides a statement from his mother,  asserting  the
recruiter told them not to check the box for asthma because it was not
a reportable asthma incident.

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

_________________________________________________________________

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. He entered active duty on 7 Aug 01 and began basic
military training (BMT). After  developing  shortness  of  breath  and
wheezing with exercise, he was evaluated by the allergy clinic and was
diagnosed with reactive airway disease or asthma.  A history of use of
inhalers in childhood was elicited and felt to represent  episodes  of
reactive airways consistent with asthma. The  applicant  indicated  he
was told by the recruiter not to mention this fact.

As  a  result,  his  commander  recommended  him  for  discharge   for
fraudulent entry. The applicant waived his option to  consult  counsel
and submit statements. The case was found legally sufficient  and  the
discharge authority directed the  applicant’s  entry-level  separation
for fraudulent entry into military service.

The applicant was separated on 6 Nov 01 with an entry-level separation
(uncharacterized) and a reenlistment code (RE) of “2C”  (Involuntarily
separated with  entry-level  separation  without  characterization  of
service). His separation  program  designator  code  (SPD)  was  “JDA”
(Fraudulent entry into military service). The applicant had  3  months
of active service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The AFBCMR Medical Consultant notes that, although the  applicant  may
not have asthma in the strictest definition, he demonstrated  abnormal
reactive  airway  disease  both  with  exercise  by  history  and   on
bronchoprovocation testing.  The Air Force and other military services
have become very strict with regard  to  asthma  and  reactive  airway
disease  in  members  deployed  to  overseas  locations.  Both   harsh
environments with regard to air quality and high rates of  respiratory
tract infections result  in  significant  problems  even  in  members’
reactive airway disease  without  definite  asthma.   The  applicant’s
experience  during  BMT  and  his  positive  bronchoprovocation   test
indicate that he is at considerably higher risk for recurrent problems
when subjected to the rigors  of  military  operational  environments.
Action and disposition in this case are proper and equitable  and  the
applicant’s appeal should be denied.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the Air  Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant on 6 Sep 02 for review and comment within 30  days.   As  of
this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.    The applicant has exhausted all remedies  provided  by  existing
law or regulations.

2.    The application was timely filed.

3.    Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented  to  demonstrate
the  existence  of  error  or  injustice  to  warrant   changing   the
applicant’s narrative reason for separation. We cannot determine  with
certainty whether the applicant had asthma, bronchitis,  or  allergies
when he enlisted. In any event, we are  persuaded  that  he  sincerely
believed his respiratory ailment and earlier use of  an  inhaler  were
not  reportable  incidents.  His  mother  corroborates  this  was  the
recruiter’s position also. We believe “fraudulent enlistment”  is  too
harsh a label for what appears to be a  somewhat  ambiguous  situation
rather than an intentional misrepresentation.  Therefore, we recommend
any doubt be resolved  in  this  applicant’s  favor  by  changing  his
narrative reason for  separation  to  “JFF”  (Secretarial  Authority).
However, as the applicant appears to have some form of reactive airway
condition that would put him at  risk  if  deployed,  we  believe  his
reenlistment  eligibility  code,  which  renders  him  ineligible  for
reenlistment, should remain unchanged. Accordingly, we  recommend  the
applicant’s records be corrected to the extent indicated below.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the  Department  of  the  Air  Force
relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that, at the time  of  his
entry level separation on 6 November 2001, the  narrative  reason  for
separation was Secretarial Authority, and he was issued  a  separation
program designator code of “JFF.”

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the  Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 19 December 2002 under the provisions of AFI  36-
2603:

                 Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Vice Chair
                 Ms. Martha J. Evans, Member
                 Ms. Diane Arnold, Member

All  members  voted  to  correct  the  records,  as  recommended.  The
following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR  Docket  Number  02-
01635 was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 9 May 02, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, dated 9 Aug 02.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Sep 02.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Vice Chair




AFBCMR 02-01635




MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

      Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air
Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority
of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is
directed that:

      The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air
Force relating to    , be corrected to show that, at the time of his
entry level separation on 6 November 2001, the narrative reason for
separation was Secretarial Authority, and he was issued a separation
program designator code of “JFF.”





   JOE G. LINEBERGER

   Director

   Air Force Review Boards Agency

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01556

    Original file (BC-2003-01556.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2005 | BC-2004-03273

    Original file (BC-2004-03273.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2003 | BC-2002-01757

    Original file (BC-2002-01757.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2003 | BC-2002-02345

    Original file (BC-2002-02345.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2006 | BC-2005-01947

    Original file (BC-2005-01947.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: AFPC/DPPD recommends the application be denied, and states, in part the applicant was processed through the Disability Evaluation System (DES) and was found unfit for continued military service based on asthma which existed prior to service. The applicant contends the determination that her asthma existed prior to her service was solely based on the single sentence in the MEB that she reported using an...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-01894

    Original file (BC-2006-01894.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was tested for asthma and subsequently discharged from the Air Force. Furthermore, the Medical Consultant states in order to qualify for MGIB benefits, the applicant was required to complete 36 months of active duty service and receive an honorable discharge. The applicant's concealment of a disqualifying medical condition at the time of enlistment examination and non-distinguished conduct while in training does not merit action by the Secretary to change his characterization of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-00218

    Original file (BC-2004-00218.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ 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 | CY2004 | BC-2003-02469

    Original file (BC-2003-02469.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that although he contends he provided medical information for the three years up to the time of his enlistment, there is no evidence to confirm this. The Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPRS reviewed this application and states they concur with the Medical Consultant’s evaluation and recommend no...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01757

    Original file (BC-2006-01757.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The IPEB reviewed his case and found the member fit and recommended, "Return to Duty." BCMR Medical Consultant's complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluations and stated he sought a second opinion by pulmonologist in December 2005 and was diagnosed with asthma after having below normal pulmonary function tests. In this respect, the Board notes...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2006-01757

    Original file (BC-2006-01757.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The IPEB reviewed his case and found the member fit and recommended, "Return to Duty." BCMR Medical Consultant's complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluations and stated he sought a second opinion by pulmonologist in December 2005 and was diagnosed with asthma after having below normal pulmonary function tests. In this respect, the Board notes...