RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02666
            INDEX CODE:  110.02
            COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  YES

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  Mar 05, 2008

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment code of 2Q (medical discharge)  be  changed  to  allow  him
reentry into the military.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was never given a test to prove or disprove he had asthma.

He is not saying he wants benefits.  He wants to be in the  military  again.


He is attending  college  and  wishes  to  enroll  in  the  Reserve  Officer
Training Corps (ROTC).

In support of his request, the applicant provided a  copy  of  his  DD  Form
214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, and results of  a
Methacholine Challenge Test.

The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

BCMR Medical Consultant’s  Note:   The  Methacholine  Challenge  Test  is  a
method of diagnosing  asthma,  especially  in  adults  where  their  medical
history of asthma is uncertain and  routine  pulmonary  function  tests  are
normal.   When  methacholine,  a  noxious  irritant,  is   administered   in
increasing concentrations to an individual  with  reactive  airway  disease,
bronchoconstriction  will  occur,  which  is  detected   through   pulmonary
function testing.   Essentially,  the  methacholine  chemically  induces  an
asthma attack.  The Methacholine Challenge Test is considered accurate,  but
has certain limitations and should not be relied on for  a  diagnosis  in  a
patient  with  symptoms   strongly   suggesting   asthma   and/or   clinical
improvement after using asthma medications.

_________________________________________________________________



STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant entered the active duty Air Force on 4 Feb 03 for  a  six-year
enlistment.

The  applicant’s  medical  records  indicate   he   was   seen   by   health
professionals in Feb 03 for shortness of air/wheezing which started after  a
bout of bronchitis.  He  was  treated  with  antibiotics  and  an  albuterol
inhaler.  His records further  indicate  he  needed  the  inhaler  prior  to
exercise.

A Methacholine Challenge Test was administered and resulted  in  a  positive
result.   The  applicant  has  a  positive  family  history  of  asthma  and
allergies but he had never been diagnosed  with  asthma.   Additionally,  he
was seen regularly for follow-ups and medication adjustments.

On 4 Apr 04, the applicant wrote a letter to the  Medical  Evaluation  Board
(MEB)  indicating his current medical condition limited the tasks  which  he
could do comfortably and requested a  medical discharge.  He further  stated
he did not want to be retrained into  another  career  field  and  felt  his
health was  deteriorating  due  to  the  chemicals  and  substances  he  was
surrounded by on a day-to-day basis.  The applicant  was  an  F-15  aircraft
maintenance apprentice.  The applicant’s commander wrote  a  letter  to  the
MEB the  same  day,  requesting  the  applicant  be  separated  due  to  his
ineligibility to deploy.

On 4 May 04,  the  Informal  Physical  Evaluation  Board  (IPEB)  ruled  the
applicant’s symptoms  began  within  one  month  of  entering  active  duty,
reflecting  a  natural   progression/manifestation   of   his   pre-existing
condition.  The applicant was found unfit and it was recommended that he  be
discharged.

On 19 Jun 04, the applicant was discharged with an honorable  discharge  for
physical disability due to a condition that existed prior to service.

Other relevant facts are outlined in the  BCMR  Medical  Consultant  opinion
which is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial of  the  applicant’s  request.
The applicant’s Methacholine Challenge Test conducted on 13 Jan 04 showed  a
decrease in his FEV1 (forced expiratory volume in 1 second) from 3.5  liters
at baseline (no methacholine given) to 2.2 liters  at  the  third  level  of
methacholine testing out of seven possible levels  of  increasing  doses  of
methacholine.  This represented a drop greater than  20  percent,  which  is
considered diagnostic of asthma.  The test was stopped at  the  third  level
due to the applicant experiencing chest  tightness  and  the  diagnosis  was
already confirmed.

On 19 Apr 04, the applicant met a MEB which referred his case to  the  IPEB.
The IPEB recommended the applicant be discharged under  other  than  Chapter
61, Title 10 (EPTS) for asthma, existed prior  to  service  without  service
aggravation.  On 10 May 04, the  applicant  agreed  with  the  findings  and
recommendations of the IPEB and waived  his  rights  to  a  Formal  Physical
Evaluation Board hearing.  At the time of his discharge, the  applicant  was
taking three medications for asthma.

Additionally, the applicant may have been taking asthma medications  at  the
time of his civilian Methacholine Challenge  retest  on  29  Dec  05,  which
could blunt the response to the methacholine, causing a false negative.

The preponderance of evidence of  the  record  shows  that  the  applicant’s
asthma condition was properly evaluated and  was  appropriately  adjudicated
to being unfitting for military service.  Action  and  disposition  in  this
case  are  proper  and  equitable  reflecting  compliance  with  Air   Force
directives that implement the law.

The complete BCMR Medical Consultant’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant states he was “slammed” with paperwork  at  the  time  of  his
discharge and had no  idea  how  to  handle  it.   He  now  understands  the
seriousness  of  having   asthma   and   its   effect   on   his   worldwide
qualifications, but contends he never had asthma as an adult or  child.   He
competed in high school cross country and baseball,  both  being  physically
demanding.

He has always wanted to be a part of the military and since  discharge,  has
assumed the role of a police  officer,  where  he  continues  his  life-long
dream by dedicating his life to protecting those around him and serving  the
community.

He never  tried  to  trick  the  system  when  he  retook  the  Methacholine
Challenge Test.  He did it to prove he does not have  asthma  and  begs  for
his reenlistment code to be changed to allow him  a  chance  to  rejoin  the
military.

He promised his grandfather before he died he  would  fight  to  be  allowed
back into the military.  Being  a  life-long  soldier  would  allow  him  to
accomplish his dreams and goals.

The applicant's 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 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 opinion 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.  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 issue  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  Docket  Number  BC-2006-02666
in Executive Session on 19 July 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
      Ms. Teri G. Spoutz, Member
      Ms. Patricia R. Collins, Member

_________________________________________________________________



The following documentary evidence was considered for BCMR  Docket  BC-2006-
02666:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, w/Atch, dated 23 Aug 06.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Memorandum, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated
                    1 Jun 07.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Jun 07.
        Exhibit E.  Applicant’s Rebuttal, undated



                                   MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
                                   Panel Chair