RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-00016
            INDEX CODE:

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: YES

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

It  appears  the  applicant  is  requesting  that  his  records  be
corrected to reflect a different  reason  for  separation  and  his
reenlistment eligibility (RE)  code  be  changed  so  that  he  can
reenlist in the Air Force.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was misdiagnosed.  He states that he tested positive for  asthma
during technical training due to a respiratory infection.   He  was
subsequently tested for asthma by a  civilian  specialist  and  the
results were negative.

In support of his appeal, applicant submitted a personal statement;
a copy of a letter from  the  Children’s  Hospital  of  Pittsburgh,
undated, and  a  copy  of  his  Pulmonary  Function  Report,  dated
5 Nov 02.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 23 July 2002, in the
grade of airman basic (AB/E-1).

On 2  Oct  02,  the  squadron  commander  initiated  administrative
discharge action against the applicant  for  erroneous  enlistment.
The reason for the proposed action was that a Chronological  Record
of Medical Care, dated 23 Sep 02, indicated he had  been  diagnosed
with asthma and it was determined the condition  existed  prior  to
service.  Because of this condition, his ability to function  in  a
military environment was  significantly  impaired.   The  commander
recommended that the applicant be given an entry-level  separation.
On that same date, applicant acknowledged receipt of the  discharge
notification.  He waived his right to consult counsel and to submit
statements in his own behalf.  On 7 Oct 02, the discharge authority
approved the entry-level separation with service uncharacterized.

The applicant received an uncharacterized entry-level separation on
15 Oct 02, by reason of “Erroneous Entry (Other),” and  was  issued
an RE  code  of  2C  (Involuntarily  separated  with  an  honorable
discharge; or entry-level separation  without  characterization  of
service).  He was credited with 2 months and 23 days of active duty
service.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The  BCMR  Medical  Consultant  reviewed   this   application   and
recommended denial.   The  applicant  was  evaluated  for  possible
asthma because of symptoms of cough, wheezing, chest tightness  and
shortness of breath with walking, marching,  running  and  at  rest
that prompted care in the emergency room during the second week  of
technical  training.   During  the  medical   evaluation   it   was
determined that the symptoms suggesting  asthma  existed  prior  to
service.  Although he was  never  formally  diagnosed  with  asthma
prior to service, he  reported  a  history  of  symptoms  including
exercise induced symptoms and allergic rhinitis prior to service as
well as a history of allergies and use of an inhaler after age  12.
He also has a family history of asthma  in  first-degree  relatives
increasing the possibility of asthma in him.  He underwent  further
evaluation by bronchoprovocation testing with a histamine challenge
test.   Based  on  symptoms  consistent   with   asthma   and   the
bronchoprovocation test  positive  for  abnormal  bronchoreactivity
consistent with asthma, he underwent entry level separation for the
disqualifying  diagnosis  of  asthma  existing  prior  to   service
(erroneous enlistment: erroneous enlistment is one that  would  not
have occurred had the relevant facts been known by  the  Air  Force
and it was not the result of fraudulent conduct on the part of  the
applicant).  Action and disposition in this  case  are  proper  and
reflect compliance with Air Force  directives  that  implement  the
law.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial of the applicant’s request.   They
found that the discharge was consistent  with  the  procedural  and
substantive   requirements    of    the    discharge    regulation.
Additionally, that the discharge was within the sound discretion of
the discharge authority.  They also noted  that  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 service,  it  would  be
unfair to the member and the service to characterize their  limited
service.  Therefore, his uncharacterized service is correct and  in
accordance with DOD  and  Air  Force  instructions.   They  further
stated that an entry-level  separation  should  not  be  viewed  as
negative or less than honorable and should  not  be  confused  with
other types of separation.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D.

HQ AFPC/DPPAE found that the RE code 2C,  “Involuntarily  separated
with an honorable  discharge;  or  entry-level  separation  without
characterization of service,” is correct.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit E.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

He disputes the claim that asthma  in  first-degree  relatives  has
ever existed.  Asthma has never been diagnosed in any of his family
members and he never used an inhaler of any kind until after he was
misdiagnosed by Allergy Service at Wilford Hall Medical  Center  on
14 Sep 02.  He  has  on  his  own  time  and  at  his  own  expense
successfully passed the same tests that were administered while  on
active duty and all the results have proven that he does  not  have
asthma or any airway hyper-reactivity at this time or has he ever.

In support of his appeal, applicant  provided  a  personal  letter,
dated 24 Jul 03; a copy of a  letter  from  the  Allegheny  General
Hospital, Div of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology,  with  results  of
tests conducted on 9 Jul 03.

Applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit G.

___________________________________________________________________

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 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 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 AFBCMR Docket  Number
BC-2003-00016 in Executive Session on 10 September 2003, under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
      Ms. Cheryl Jacobson, Member
      Ms. Martha Maust, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 Jan 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, dated 16 Apr 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 19 May 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAE, dated 27 Jun 03.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Jul 03.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, Applicant, dated 24 Jul 03, w/atchs.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Chair