RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-00098
                       INDEX CODE:  110.00
                       COUNSEL:  NONE

                       HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  19 JULY 2008

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The her records be corrected to:

      a.    Change the Narrative Reason for Separation from  Erroneous
Enlistment to Medical Conditions.

      b.    Award of the Global War on Terrorism  Service  Medal (GWOT-
S).

EXAMINER’S NOTE:  On 24 January 2007, the applicant was notified  that
the GWOT-S will be added to her DD Form 214.  Therefore, the remaining
issue for consideration by the  Board  is  the  Narrative  Reason  for
Separation

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

It was recommended that she be separated for a medical condition.

In support of her request, the applicant provided her  Honor  Graduate
Ribbon Certificate, AETC Form 125A, Record of Administrative  Training
Action, Standard Form (SF) 600, Chronological Record of Medical  Care,
and Student Training Report.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force (RegAF) on  6 December
2005, as an airman (Amn) for a period of four years.

On 30 March 2006, the applicant was notified of her commander’s intent
to  recommend  her  for  an  entry-level  separation   for   erroneous
enlistment for the following reason:

       SF  Form  600,  Chronological  Record  of  Medical  Care  dated
21 February 2006, stated the applicant  was  diagnosed  with  Exercise
Induced Asthma.

The commander advised the applicant of her right  to  consult  legal
counsel, and if she so desired an appointment  would  be  made  upon
request, and to submit  statements  in  her  own  behalf.   She  was
advised that failure to consult with counsel  or  submit  statements
could constitute her waiver of her rights to do so.

On 30 March 2006, the applicant waived her right to consult  counsel
and to submit a statement.

On 4 April 2006, the base legal office reviewed the applicant’s case
and found it legally sufficient to support separation and  recommend
the applicant be separated with an entry-level separation.

On 12 April 2006, the discharge authority  approved  the  separation
and  directed  the  applicant  be  discharged  with  an  entry-level
separation without probation and rehabilitation.

The  applicant  was  separated  with  an  uncharacterized  entry-level
separation on 13 April 2006  under  the  provisions  of  AFI  36-3208,
Administrative  Separation  of   Airman   (entry-level   –   erroneous
enlistment).

The applicant served  four  months  and  eight  days  of  active  duty
service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ  AFPC/DPPRS  recommends  denial.    They   state   based   on   the
documentation on file in the applicant’s master personnel records, the
discharge  was  consistent  with  the   procedural   and   substantive
requirements of the discharge regulation.  The  discharge  was  within
the discretion of the discharge authority.

Airmen  are  given  an  entry-level  separation  when  separation   is
initiated in the first 180 days of  continuous  active  service.   The
Department of Defense (DoD) determined if a servicemember served  less
than 180 days of continuous active service, it would be unfair to  the
servicemember and the service to characterize their limited service.

The applicant did not submit any evidence or identify  any  errors  or
injustices  that  occurred  in  the  processing  of   her   discharge.
Furthermore, she did not provided any facts to warrant a change to her
narrative reason for separation.

A copy of the AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 9
February 2007, for review and response.  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  an  error  or   an   injustice.    After   careful
consideration of the circumstances  of  this  case  and  the  evidence
provided by the applicant, we are not persuaded the  narrative  reason
for separation the applicant received was in  error  or  unjust.   The
applicant’s military records reflect while in technical  training  she
was diagnosed with  exercise  induced  asthma.   Her  records  further
reflect she was unaware of her  condition  prior  to  entering  active
service.  Based on the  applicant’s  diagnosis  of  exercised  induced
asthma, the Trainee Health Flight  recommended  she  be  removed  from
training and be  separated  with  an  administrative  discharge.   The
applicant  did  not  request  a  waiver.   The  applicant’s  commander
concurred with the recommendation of the  Trainee  Health  Flight  and
recommended the applicant be administratively separated  based  on  an
erroneous enlistment.  The discharge the applicant received  indicates
an uncharacterized entry-level separation for serving  less  than  six
months of service which would  be  appropriate  considering  that  the
applicant served four months of active military  service.   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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2007-00098 in Executive Session on 10 April 2007 under the  provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

                 Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Josephine L. Davis, Member
                 Ms. Patricia R. Collins, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 2 Jan 07, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 18 Jan 07.
      Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Feb 07.




                             CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
                             Panel Chair