RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-00165
            INDEX CODE:  100.03
      XXXXXXXXXXXXXX   COUNSEL:  NONE

      XXXXXXXXXXXXXX   HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  15 JUL 2006

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed  to  enable  her  to
pursue a commission in the Air Force.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She believes her discharge was incorrectly documented and prevents her
from pursuing  a  commission.   She  feels  the  disqualification  was
specific only to the Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) she  had  at  the
time of her discharge.

In support of her request, the applicant submits a personal statement,
a copy of DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active
Duty and background documentation related to her discharge.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force as an airman basic  on
27 May 1998, for a term of 4 years.

She experienced chronic lower back pain  and  was  placed  on  several
medical profiles beginning in September 1999.  The  profile  dated  23
March  2000,  indicated  she  was  not  worldwide  qualified  and  her
restrictions to duty were documented as no mobility, no  lifting  over
10 pounds and no  high  impact  activities.   On  19  June  2000,  she
underwent a medical evaluation board (MEB), and on 26 June  2000,  the
informal physical evaluation board (IPEB) determined that her  chronic
lower back pain was associated with mild scoliosis and  retrolisthesis
with hypermobility of L5-S1, which existed prior  to  service  without
service aggravation.  The IPEB found the applicant unfit for continued
service and recommended administrative discharge.

On 29 June 2000, the applicant agreed with the Board’s findings and on
30 June 2000, officials within the Office of the Secretary of the  Air
Force directed she be discharged without disability benefits

She was administratively  separated  on  21  August  2000,  due  to  a
disability that  existed  prior  to  service.   She  served  2  years,
2 months and 25 days total active service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AETC/SGPS recommends denial.  SGPS states a review of the  applicant’s
record reveals a long history of low back pain for  which  she  met  a
medical board  and  was  released  from  the  Air  Force.   Her  final
prognosis notes her condition to be chronic; long-term improvement  of
resolution is unlikely, and that she should  be  restricted  to  light
desk duties only with limitations of lifting, bending and  all  impact
activities.

SGPS states her condition was noted as chronic and  although  she  has
maintained a lifestyle that has not aggravated her  condition,  return
to the military can not guarantee this will  continue,  her  diagnosis
and long term prognosis is not conducive to military service.

The SGPS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant states, she disagrees with several items  found  in  the
advisory and would like to pursue a commission in the Air Force.

When she enlisted in the Air Force she chose  an  AFSC  based  on  her
outstanding ASVAB scores and was guaranteed an AFSC in her  enlistment
contract.  Individuals select or are limited to certain  AFSCs  within
the Air Force due to physical limitations  such  as  color  blindness,
physical fitness standards and so on.

She states that AFI 48-123, A 18.2.5, states, for a military member to
be deployable, that individual must be able to perform “heavy physical
work over at least a short period of time.”  She is capable  of  doing
physical work as long as it is not part of her daily job requirement.

She believes she has provided the Board  sufficient  documentation  to
show she is physically better now than at the time of her discharge.

Her complete response is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

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 an  error  or  injustice.   We  took  notice  of  the
applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case.  In
particular, we note the statement provided  by  the  applicant,  which
states at the present time she is capable of doing  physical  work  as
long as it is not part of her daily job requirement.   However,  while
it appears that she is currently not exhibiting signs of chronic  back
pain,  the  Board  agrees  with  the  Air  Force  office  of   primary
responsibility that the applicant  was  properly  evaluated  while  on
active duty and that duties within the Air Force are filled on a  need
rather than personal preference or  limitations.   Therefore,  in  the
absence of persuasive evidence to the contrary, the Board adopts their
rationale as the basis for the conclusion that the applicant  has  not
been the victim of an error or injustice and finds no compelling basis
to recommend granting the relief sought in the application.

_________________________________________________________________

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 Docket  Number  BC-2005-
00165 in Executive Session on 24 May 2005, under the provisions of AFI
36-2603:

                 Ms. Marilyn M. Thomas, Vice Chair
                 Ms. Jan Mulligan, Member
                 Mr. Michael V. Barbino, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 Dec 04, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AETC/SGPS, dated 18 Mar 05.
      Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Mar 05.
      Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 22 Apr 05.






      MARILYN M. THOMAS
      Vice Chair