RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-03266
                                             INDEX CODE:  110.00
      XXXXXXXXXXXXX                     COUNSEL:  NONE

                                             HEARING DESIRED:  NO


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  23 April 2008


________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Reentry Code (RE) of  “4C”  be  changed  to  allow  him  the  option  of
returning to the military.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was taken to Wilford Hall Medical Center (WHMC) on 16 November 2003  with
shortness of breath.  He was released back to the base  with  the  diagnosis
of Reactive Airway Disease (RAD), asthma, and was  subsequently  discharged.


After being released and returning home, he saw  a  pulmonary  and  critical
care doctor and, after further testing, does not have RAD.  His  doctor  now
questions if this was the case then and  how  that  determination  was  made
since no testing was done.

In support  of  his  appeal,  he  has  provided  copies  of  memorandums  to
Congresswoman Myrick and her response, his DD Form 214,  dated  24  November
2003, and numerous medical documents from his military medical  records  and
Presbyterian Hospital, Charlotte, NC.

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant entered the Regular Air Force on  10  November  2003,  and,  while
attending Basic Military Training (BMT), was taken by ambulance to  WHMC  on
16 November 2003 with shortness of breath.

On 20 November 2003, he was notified of his commander's intent to  recommend
him for an erroneous enlistment with an entry  level  separation  due  to  a
medical narrative summary, dated 17 November 2003, which found  he  did  not
meet minimum medical standards to enlist.

The commander advised applicant of  his  right  to  consult  legal  counsel,
submit statements in his own behalf, and that his failure  to  do  so  would
constitute a waiver of his right to do so.

On 20 November 2003, applicant waived  his  right  to  consult  counsel  and
submit statements in his own behalf.

A legal review was conducted on 20 November 2003, in which the  staff  judge
advocate  found  the  case  file  to  be  legally  sufficient   to   support
separation, and recommended applicant be separated from the service with  an
entry-level separation.

Applicant was discharged on 24 November 2003 in the grade  of  Airman  Basic
(E-1), with an entry level  separation,  in  accordance  with  AFI  36-3208,
Chapter 5, Section C, Defective Enlistments, paragraph 5.14 under Basis  for
Erroneous Enlistment.  The  Narrative  Reason  for  Separation  was  “Failed
Medical/Physical Procurement Standards”, and he was given an RE Code of  4C,
“Separated for …failure to meet  physical  standards  for  enlistment…”   He
served a total of 15 days net active service.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The AFBCMR Medical Consultant advises that  no  change  in  the  applicant’s
records is warranted.  A review of his military medical records  shows  that
he had a history of asthma when he was seven years of  age,  that  he  noted
this history of asthma on his pre-enlistment physical examination, and  that
he received a waiver to join the Air Force.

Shortly after entering BMT, he had an attack of respiratory  distress  which
required an ambulance trip to the  Emergency  Department  at  WHMC,  and  he
responded to standard asthma  medications.   Attacks  such  as  the  one  he
experienced are unpredictable and portends the possibility of  a  recurrence
of  asthma  under  adverse  conditions,  such  as  are  found  in  the  high
operations  tempo  of  the  Air  Force.   This  represents   a   significant
respiratory condition and is ultimately likely to prohibit  his  utilization
as  a  Total  Force  asset  well  into  the  foreseeable  future.   This  is
particularly relevant in the context of  the  harsh  operational  conditions
and physical stressors confronting all members  of  today’s  Air  and  Space
Expeditionary Force.  His condition poses  a  significant  risk  for  sudden
deterioration that could put himself and his unit’s mission at  grave  risk.
As a result, retention or reenlistment would not be in  the  best  interests
of the applicant or the Air Force.

The  preponderance  of  evidence  of  the  record  shows  that   applicant’s
condition posed a continued significant risk to himself and  the  Air  Force
mission, and that an entry level separation was the  appropriate  course  of
action.  Action and disposition in  this  case  are  proper  and  equitable,
reflecting compliance with Air Force directives that implement the law.

The AFBCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the evaluation was  forwarded  to  the  applicant  on  28
August 2007, for review and comment, within 30 days.  However,  as  of  this
date, no response has been received by this office.

________________________________________________________________

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.  A review of  the  applicant’s
military medical records shows  that  he  had  a  history  of  asthma  which
required a waiver for him to enlist.   The  BCMR  Medical  Consultant  notes
that attacks such as the one he experienced are unpredictable  and  portends
the possibility of a recurrence under adverse conditions such as  are  found
in the high operations tempo of the Air Force,  particularly  in  the  harsh
operational conditions and physical stressors  confronting  all  members  of
today’s Air and Space Expeditionary Force.  Therefore,  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-2006-03266
in Executive Session on 10 October 2007, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                       Mr. James W. Russell, III, Panel Chair
                       Ms. Janet I. Hassan, Member
                       Mr. Clarence R. Anderegg, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 1 Oct 06, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR Medical Advisor, dated 7 Aug 07.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 28 Aug 07.




                                   JAMES W. RUSSELL, III
                                   Panel Chair