ADDENDUM TO
                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  97-02957
                                             INDEX CODE 108.04  108.10
                                             COUNSEL: Joseph W. Kastl

                                             HEARING DESIRED:  Yes

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

In the applicant’s request for reconsideration,  she  now  requests  a
medical retirement.
_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant was diagnosed with asthma while she was on  active  duty
prior to joining the Air Force Reserve.  In Nov 96, she was discharged
from the Air Force Reserve due to physical disqualification (asthma).

In her original 1997  appeal,  the  applicant  requested  one  of  the
following:  That her discharge order be changed so she did not need  a
waiver to reenlist, she be reinstated with back pay/points for  missed
time, or she receive a medical retirement with pay if not  allowed  to
reenlist.  On 3 September 1998,  the  AFBCMR  denied  the  applicant’s
appeal.

For an accounting of  the  facts  and  circumstances  surrounding  the
applicant’s separation, and, the rationale of the earlier decision  by
the Board, see the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit F.

The applicant submits another DD  Form  149  and  requests  a  medical
retirement. Her counsel contends she is either entitled to  a  medical
board and medical discharge or she is fully fit and should be returned
to the Reserves. A review by a retired  Navy  nurse  who  asserts  the
applicant should be properly re-evaluated by a pulmonologist and/or an
asthma specialist is provided.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit G.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Pursuant to the AFBCMR’s 15 Aug 02 request,  HQ  AFRC/DPM  provided  a
cover advisory  opinion,  which  also  includes  evaluations  from  HQ
AFRC/SG, JA, DPMF and DPML. Essentially,  they  assert  the  applicant
entered the Reserves with a pre-existing condition  and  there  is  no
documentation  that  continued   Reserve   service   aggravated   that
condition. Therefore, the applicant  is  not  entitled  to  a  medical
disability retirement. Her medical review and discharge was  effective
prior to the  effective  date  of  implementation  of  the  Disability
Evaluation System (DES)  which  is  clearly  documented  in  the  DODI
1332.28, dated  11  Nov  96,  as  120  days  after  the  date  of  the
instruction. Although the applicant’s discharge  on  11  Nov  was  not
actually prior to DODD 1332.18 (4  Nov  96),  her  Medical  Evaluation
Board (MEB) occurred prior to the directive’s authorized  instruction,
not 120 days afterwards. The implementing instruction  did  not  allow
entry into the DES for those MEBs  already  in  process,  nor  was  it
retroactive. The applicant has approximately 13 years, 9 months and 27
days of satisfactory service and does not meet the minimum  retirement
eligibility criteria. She must have a minimum of 15 years satisfactory
service to qualify for retirement at age 60.  Based  on  documentation
in her  case,  the  applicant  is  entitled  to  and  has  pursued  VA
assistance in evaluation her condition. She is within  her  rights  to
continue to exercise this option.  Additionally, if she  believes  she
is medically qualified for military service, she  should  contact  her
local recruiter for possible options.

A complete copy of the HQ AFRC/DPM cover letter, with attachments,  is
at Exhibit H.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Complete copies of the evaluations were forwarded to the applicant  on
22 Nov 02 for review and response within 30 days. On  18 Mar  03,  the
applicant faxed  a  rebuttal  through  her  counsel,  contending  that
obtaining a waiver is unacceptable. She claims  her  local  recruiters
told her there is no waiver for asthma and even if she could get  one,
it would take up too much of their time and effort.  She  served  with
honors and was cleared worldwide after the diagnosis  of  asthma.  Not
being eligible for full medical retirement is unfair.

The applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit J.
_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the  applicant’s
submission, we are not persuaded that she should be afforded a medical
retirement.  At  this  time,  she  apparently  does  not  dispute  her
diagnosis  of  asthma,  yet  her  counsel  appears  to  question   the
diagnosis. If the applicant believes she is
currently  medically  qualified  for  military,  as   she   originally
contended, she can take a physical exam if  she  applies  for  reentry
into the Reserves  to  demonstrate  she  is  medically  qualified  for
military duty. Otherwise, she has  not  provided  persuasive  evidence
demonstrating to our  satisfaction  that  her  medical  condition  was
insufficiently or inaccurately evaluated or that  she  was  wrongfully
discharged from the Reserves. The applicant entered the Reserve with a
pre-existing condition and she has not  shown  that  Reserve  military
service aggravated her medical condition.  In any event,  her  Medical
Evaluation Board,  disqualification  and  separation  processing  were
completed prior to the  effective  date  and  implementation  of  DODD
1332.18. Further, she does not qualify for a medical  retirement  from
the Reserves  at  age  60  because  she  does  not  meet  the  minimum
requirement of 15 years of satisfactory service. In view of the above,
we agree with the recommendations of the Air Force Reserve  and  adopt
the rationale expressed  as  the  basis  for  our  decision  that  the
applicant has failed to sustain her burden of having  suffered  either
an error or an injustice.  Absent persuasive evidence to the contrary,
we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought.

The documentation provided with this case was sufficient to  give  the
Board a clear understanding of the  issues  involved  and  a  personal
appearance, with or without legal counsel, would not  have  materially
added to that understanding.  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 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 19 March 2003, under the provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                             Mr. Joseph G. Diamond, Panel Chair
                             Ms. Peggy E. Gordon, Acting as Member
                             Mr. Michael V. Barbino, Member

The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number 97-
02957 was considered:

   Exhibit F.  Record of Proceedings, dated 18 Sep 98, w/atchs.
   Exhibit G.  DD Form 149, dated 12 Jul 02, w/atchs.
   Exhibit H.  Letter, HQ AFREC/DPM, dated 4 Nov 02, w/atchs.
   Exhibit I.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 Nov 02.
   Exhibit J.  Letter, Applicant, dated 18 Mar 03.




                                   JOSEPH G. DIAMOND
                                   Panel Chair