RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

      IN THE MATTER OF:            DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-01894
            INDEX CODE: 110.00
      XXXXXXX                     COUNSEL:  NONE

                                   HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 24 DECEMBER 2008

______________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  He be re-instated on active duty.

2.  His records be changed to allow him to apply  for  Montgomery  GI  Bill
(MGIB) benefits.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

While he was attending technical training, he was taken out of training  to
complete medical testing due to his  history  of  Kawasaki's  disease.   He
states he was sick with pneumonia; however, he was  not  aware.   During  a
physical evaluation he began to cough up blood, consequently he was sent to
the medical clinic and placed on a medical waiver.  Because  the  pneumonia
was taking longer than normal to clear, his personal  medical  history  was
requested.  The records indicated he suffered from chronic bronchitis  from
allergies he had as a child.  He was tested  for  asthma  and  subsequently
discharged from the Air Force.  After his discharge, he continued  to  have
problems breathing and chest pains, and was administered a  lab  test.  His
EKG and blood work produced negative  results;  however,  the  chest  x-ray
showed a lesion in his left upper lobe.  The  doctor  believed  the  lesion
resulted from over exertion and a coughing spasm occurring after running  a
mile and a  half  physical  evaluation  while  he  was  sick.   The  doctor
indicated the lung tissue would heal slowly and would  take  six  to  eight
months to repair itself.  Once the  lesion  healed,  the  applicant  had  a
Methocoline Challenge test designed to induce an asthma attack.  This  test
returned negative results for  any  residual  scarring  from  the  disease.
Considering  the  test  produced  negative  results,  he  believes  he  was
wrongfully discharged.

In support of his request, the applicant submits a personal letter, a  copy
of his Pulmonary Function  Report  and  other  excerpts  from  his  medical
records.


His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 27 Jan 04. On  4 Jun 04,  he
was notified by his commander that he was  recommending  he  be  discharged
from the Air Force under the provisions of AFPD 36-32, Military Retirements
and Separations and AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation  of  Airman  for
Erroneous Enlistment.  The specific reasons for this action were on 21  Apr
04, he was diagnosed with  asthma  and  it  was  determined  his  condition
existed prior to service.  On 4 Jun 04, he acknowledged receipt and  waived
his right to counsel and elected  not  to  submit  statements  on  his  own
behalf.  In a legal review of his case, the  base  legal  office  found  it
legally sufficient and recommended an  entry-level  separation.   Applicant
was  discharged  in  the  grade  of  airman  basic  on 30   Jun   04   with
uncharacterized service. He served a total of five months and four days  on
active duty.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant  recommends  denial.   The  Medical  Consultant
states medical standards for enlistment (which also apply to members during
the first 180-days of active duty)  indicate,  asthma,  including  reactive
airways disease, exercise induced  bronchospasm  or  asthmatic  bronchitis,
reliably diagnosed at any age is disqualifying for  enlistment.  Thus,  the
medical standards are broader  than  a  defined  diagnosis  of  asthma  and
include reactive airways that may not meet  the  strict  criteria  for  the
diagnosis of asthma.  A positive bronchoprovocation test when performed  in
subjects  with  symptoms  suspected  to  be  asthma   reliably   identifies
individuals with asthma and abnormal reactive airways that is disqualifying
for military service. Pre-service  medical  documentation  dated  the  year
before the applicant's enlistment reflects  active  treatment  for  chronic
respiratory symptoms diagnosed as asthma.  The applicant reported onset  of
problems beginning at age seven or eight when seeking care in service.  The
applicant did not report his disqualifying medical history at the  time  of
enlistment and the Medical Consultant opines there was sufficient basis for
discharge based on fraudulent enlistment.  The emergency department  record
and  the  cardiac  catheterization  report   reflect   continued   symptoms
consistent with the diagnosis of asthma. The methacholine  brochoprovoction
testing performed following separation and  submitted  in  the  absence  of
additional clinical information (medications, etc.) does not  overcome  the
previous disqualifying medical  history,  both  pre-service  and  while  in
service.  Air Force policy with  regard  to  asthma  and  reactive  airways
disease is reinforced by experience with the significant numbers of medical
casualties due to asthma and  reactive  airways  disease,  particularly  in
members deployed to overseas locations. Harsh environments with  regard  to
altitude, air quality and high rates of respiratory tract infections result
in significant problems even in members without definite  asthma  including
those with childhood histories of asthma or reactive airways  disease  that
require the use of inhalers.  The applicant's medical history indicates  he
is at an  unacceptable  risk  for  unpredictable  recurrent  problems  when
subjected to the rigors of military operational environments.  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.  Since the applicant was  discharged  under
the provisions for entry-level separations, his  character  of  service  is
"uncharacterized".  The  applicant  requests  a  change  of  his  discharge
certificate to show an honorable discharge.  Airmen are in  an  entry-level
status during the first 180 days of continuous active military service  and
if administratively separated during this  period  receive  an  entry-level
separation.  This discharge does not attempt to characterize  the  type  of
service good or bad.  An honorable characterization may  be  given  by  the
Secretary of the  Air  Force  when  it  is  clearly  warranted  by  unusual
circumstances of personal conduct and performance of  military  duty.   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 service
from 'uncharacterized" to  "honorable".   Based  on  the  preponderance  of
evidence of the record, the Medical Consultant concludes  the  actions  and
dispositions  in  this  case  are  proper  and  equitable  reflecting   the
compliance with the Air Force directives that implement the law.

The complete Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 6  Apr
07 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this office has
received no response (Exhibit D).

________________________________________________________________

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 an error or injustice.  After  careful  consideration  of  the
available evidence, the Board found no indication that the actions taken to
affect his discharge and characterization of  his  service  were  improper,
contrary to the provisions of the governing regulations in  effect  at  the
time. Therefore, based on the available evidence of record, the Board finds
no compelling basis upon which to favorably consider this application.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did  not  demonstrate
the existence of material error or injustice; the  application  was  denied
without  a  personal  appearance;  and  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-2006-01894
in Executive Session on 8 May 2007 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Kathleen B. O'Sullivan, Member
                 Mr. Garry G. Sauner, Member

The following documentary evidence  pertaining  to  Docket  Number  BC-2007-
01894 was considered:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 28 Jun 06, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Medical Consultant Letter, dated 4 Apr 07.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Apr 07.




            CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
            Panel Chair