RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                    DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00218
                                     INDEX CODE: 110.02
    xxxxxxxxxxx           COUNSEL:  NONE

    xxxxxxxx                    HEARING DESIRED: NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The narrative reason for her separation  and  her  reenlistment  eligibility
(RE) code be changed so she may reenlist.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She was discharged from the Air Force for asthma.  An exam  conducted  by  a
specialist after her discharge, found she had no traces of  asthma  past  or
present.  She has no trouble breathing or exercising.

In support of her request, she submits  a  letter  from  her  allergist  and
asthma testing documents.  Her submission, with attachments, is  at  Exhibit
A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on  4  March  2003.   On  13
February 2003, the applicant completed a Report of Medical History in  which
she indicated never having asthma or shortness of breath.

On 17 March 2003,  during  a  medical  consultation  by  the  Department  of
Allergy/Immunology, the attending physician  made  an  assessment  that  the
applicant’s  asthma  was  exercise  induced.   On  10  December  2001,   the
applicant was  placed  on  Temporary  Duty  Restriction  and  prescribed  an
inhaler.

On 21 March 2003, in accordance with AFPD 36-32 and AFI  36-3208,  paragraph
5.14, Erroneous Enlistment, the commander  initiated  discharge  proceedings
against the applicant.  The commander indicated that the applicant  did  not
meet minimum medical standards to enlist and should not  have  been  allowed
to join the Air Force because of asthma.  The applicant was advised  of  her
rights in this matter.  The applicant waived her right  to  counsel  and  to
submit statements in her behalf.  On 24 March 2003, the discharge  authority
directed that the applicant be discharged from the Air Force with an  entry-
level separation.  Accordingly, applicant was discharged on  26  March  2003
by  reason  of  “Failed  Medical/Physical  Procurement  Standards”  with   a
Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of  “4C.”   She  had  served  23 days  on
active duty.

Examiner’s Note:  An RE code of “4C, Separated for concealment  of  juvenile
records, minority, or failure to meet physical  standards  for  enlistment…”
renders her ineligible for immediate reenlistment, but  eligible  for  prior
service enlistment with an approved waiver.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant  recommends  the  application  be  denied.   The
Medical Consultant indicates that medical standards for enlistment (and  for
continued  service)  indicate  that  “asthma,  including   reactive   airway
disease, exercise induced bronchospasm  or  asthmatic  bronchitis,  reliably
diagnosed at  any  age”  is  disqualifying  for  enlistment.   Although  the
applicant  may  not  have  asthma  in  the  strictest  definition,  but  was
diagnosed with abnormal bronchial hyper-reactivity  consistent  with  asthma
or  reactive  airways  disease  based  on  bronchoprovocation  testing  with
inhaled histamine.  The BCMR Medical Consultant states that the  applicant’s
experience during training and  her  positive  histamine  bronchoprovocation
test indicate  that  she  is  at  considerably  higher  risk  for  recurrent
problems when subjected to the rigors of military operational  environments.
 The BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 18 November 2004, a copy of the Air Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to
the applicant for review and comment.  As of this date, this office has  not
received a 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.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of error or injustice.  After careful review  of  the  applicant’s
submission, we found no evidence to indicate  her  discharge  from  the  Air
Force was inappropriate or unjust.  Applicant contends she  has  no  trouble
breathing or exercising and the exam  conducted  by  an  allergy  specialist
after her discharge, found she had no traces  of  asthma  past  or  present.
However, we do not find these arguments, in and of themselves,  sufficiently
persuasive  to  override  the  rationale  expressed  by  the  BCMR   Medical
Consultant.  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.  Therefore, we agree with the findings and recommendation of  the
BCMR Medical Consultant and  adopt  his  rationale  as  the  basis  for  our
conclusion that the applicant has  not  been  the  victim  of  an  error  or
injustice.  We note the applicant’s reenlistment eligibility code “4C” is  a
waiverable code and if she wishes to reenter military service, her  RE  code
can be waived depending upon the needs of the service to which she  applies.
 Therefore, in view of the above and in  the  absence  of  evidence  to  the
contrary, we find no compelling  basis  to  recommend  granting  the  relief
sought in this 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-2004-00218
in Executive Session on 1 February 2005, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

            Mr. Roscoe Hinton, Jr, Panel Chair
            Mr. Gary G. Sauner, Member
            Mr. Joseph D. Yount, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 13 Jan 04, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated
                16 Nov 04.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Nov 04.



                                   ROSCOE HINTON JR
                                   Panel Chair