RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03835
            INDEX CODE:  110.00, 108.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  17 JUNE 2008

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His  general  (under  honorable  conditions)  discharge  be  changed  to  an
honorable medical discharge.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was diagnosed with asthma  in  early  October  2006,  when  he  collapsed
during physical training.  He was informed by his practitioner  and  primary
care provider of a medical discharge, but instead he was discharged  with  a
general discharge for minor disciplinary infractions.

In support  of  his  request,  applicant  provided  copies  of  his  medical
records.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 25 May 04, for  a  period  of
six years in the grade of airman first class.  His highest  grade  held  was
senior airman.  The record contains one enlisted performance report with  an
overall rating of “5.”

On 6 Nov 06, applicant’s commander notified him  that  he  was  recommending
that  he  be  discharged  from  the  Air  Force   for   minor   disciplinary
infractions.  The commander  recommended  the  applicant  receive  an  under
honorable conditions (general) discharge based on the following:

      1.  On 16 May 05, applicant received a  Letter  of  Counseling  (LOC),
for failure to report to Flight training on time.

      2.  On 18 Jul 06, applicant received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR),  for
being late for training and not being present for the clearing barrel.

      3.  On 23 Jul 06, applicant received an LOR for being  observed  in  a
compromising position while posted in the Weapons Storage Area.

      4.  On 7 Sep 06, applicant received  an  Article  15,  for  using  his
Government Travel Card while not in PCS or TDY status between  on  or  about
(o/a) 25 Mar 06 and o/a 19 Jul 06.   Punishment  consisted  of  a  suspended
reduction to the grade  of  airman  first  class,  suspended  forfeiture  of
$797.00 pay, and restriction to the base for 45 days.

      5.  On 3 Oct 06, applicant received an LOR for having  a  conversation
with a prisoner.  On 31 Oct 06, applicant’s previously suspended Article  15
punishment was vacated, for making a false official statement.

Applicant acknowledged receipt of  the  discharge  notification  and,  after
consulting with counsel, waived his right to submit statements  in  his  own
behalf.  The Staff Judge Advocate  reviewed  the  case  file  and  found  it
legally sufficient to support discharge and recommended a general  discharge
without probation and rehabilitation.  The discharge authority approved  the
separation  and  directed  a  general  discharge   without   probation   and
rehabilitation.

On 30 Nov 06, applicant was discharged in the grade of airman  first  class,
under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, by reason of misconduct,  with  service
characterized as under honorable  conditions  (general).   He  was  credited
with two years, six months, and five days of active military service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant is of the opinion that a change of  the  records
is warranted  to  place  the  applicant  on  the  TDRL  with  a  30  percent
disability rating and re-evaluation in 12-18 months from  the  date  of  the
original administrative  separation  to  determine  through  the  Disability
Evaluation System the most appropriate course of action.

The preponderance of evidence of  the  record  shows  that  the  applicant’s
medical  condition  was  not  completely   considered   at   the   time   of
administrative discharge.  Action and disposition  in  this  case  were  not
properly executed reflecting non-compliance with Air Force  directives  that
implement the law.

Since the  applicant  was  pending  an  administrative  discharge,  a  “dual
action” case would have been forwarded to the Secretary  of  the  Air  Force
Personnel Council (SAFPC).  The SAFPC would then be tasked to determine  the
reason for the separation,  and  the  characterization  of  the  applicant’s
service.  The Council would likely have found that the  applicant’s  medical
condition in no way influenced or mitigated his  misconduct.   However,  the
Council would then have to weigh the severity of the misconduct  versus  the
severity of the applicant’s medical condition.   While  the  misconduct  has
been relatively  minor  (one  Article  15,  suspended  then  vacated,  three
Letters of Reprimand, and one Letter of Counseling), his  pulmonary  testing
was surprisingly quite poor, despite  a  reported  “good”  effort.   On  the
other hand, his asthma seems to have had little effect  on  his  ability  to
perform his duties as a Security Forces member.

The Medical Consultant offers several options to the Board:

      1.  As the applicant is only asking for an honorable discharge,  grant
him that request.

      2.  Consider that the severity of the medical condition outweighs  the
level of misconduct and award the applicant a 30 percent  disability  rating
with permanent disability retirement.

      3.  Consider  that  the  severity  of  the  misconduct  outweighs  the
medical condition, since there was no  connection  between  the  applicant’s
medical condition and his episodes of  misconduct,  and  leave  the  General
discharge as is.

       4.   Invite  the  applicant  to  be  reevaluated  (9   months   after
separation) fully  by  a  pulmonologist  at  an  Air  Force  medical  center
(preferably Wilford Hall) and initiate a Medical  Evaluation  Board  process
as appropriate.  This might be difficult to accomplish.

      5.  Place the applicant on TDRL at a 30 percent disability rating  and
have him be reevaluated in 12-18 months  from  his  original  administrative
discharge.


Since there was scant information about  the  applicant’s  asthma  condition
available in the package (two clinical visits  and  the  civilian  Pulmonary
Function Tests), that the latter choice may be the  most  appropriate.   The
applicant was denied his due process when he was administratively  separated
without consideration of his medical condition.

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

_________________________________________________________________

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The SAFPC reviewed this  application  recommends  denial.   It  appears  the
former member’s case should have been processed  as  a  dual  action.   That
said, they found absolutely no link between the member’s misconduct and  his
diagnosed asthma and opines that if the case had been processed  as  a  dual
action, the Personnel Council would have directed  administrative  discharge
IAW with AFI 36-3208.

The SAFPC complete evaluation is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 17 Aug 07, a copy of the  Air  Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant for review and comment within 30 days.  To date,  a  response  has
not been received.  (Exhibit D)

On 19 Sep 07, a copy  of  the  SAF/MRBP  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant for review and comment within 30 days.  To date,  a  response  has
not been received.  (Exhibit F)

On 26 Sep 07, copies of the Air Force  evaluations  were  forwarded  to  the
applicant after being notified  of  a  new  mailing  address.   To  date,  a
response has not been received.  (Exhibit G)

_________________________________________________________________

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 carefully reviewing the evidence  of
record, the applicant’s contentions,  and  the  conflicting  recommendations
between the BCMR Medical Consultant and SAFPC, we are not persuaded  that  a
change in the record is warranted.  Additionally, we took note of the  SAFPC
determination that had the applicant’s case been processed as a dual  action
case, administrative discharge would have been directed, as  they  found  no
link between the member’s misconduct and his diagnosed  asthma.   Therefore,
we agree with the opinion and recommendation of  the  SAFPC  and  adopt  its
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.

_________________________________________________________________

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-
03835 in Executive Session on 1 November 2007, under the provisions  of  AFI
36-2603:


      Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
      Ms. Mary C. Puckett, Member
      Ms. Debra K. Walker, Member

The following documentary evidence  pertaining  to  Docket  Number  BC-2006-
03835 was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 6 Feb 07, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Memorandum, BCMR Medical Consultant,
                dated 13 Aug 07.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Aug 07.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBP, dated 18 Sep 07.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 19 Sep 07.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 26 Sep 07.




                                             MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
                                             Panel Chair