RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-01336
            INDEX CODE:  110.02
            COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: Nov 04, 2008

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His  uncharacterized  entry-level  discharge  be  changed  to  an  honorable
medical discharge.

His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from  Active  Duty,  be
corrected to reflect the correct term of military service.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He placed his life on hold for well over a  year  to  enter  and  serve  the
United States honorably and to the best of his abilities.

He quit his job and discontinued his  studies  as  a  full-time  student  to
enter the Air Force.  As a result, he lost his dependent  medical  insurance
coverage status  and  has  been  forced  to  borrow  money  to  get  medical
treatment.

He served over six months in the Air Force Reserves as part of  the  Delayed
Enlistment Program and was not credited with that service even  though  that
credit was a part of  his  certified  enlistment  agreement.   His  term  of
service exceeded 10 months  and  should  have  afforded,  at  a  minimum,  a
medical or honorable discharge.

On 10 Feb 06, and within a few days after reporting to  basic  training,  he
suffered a fainting spell and was hospitalized.  Tests  revealed  he  had  a
hyperthyroid condition and he was only given medications to keep  his  heart
rate down.  In  addition,  he  states  the  Air  Force  denied  him  medical
treatment for a condition which he never knew existed and was not  diagnosed
despite two prior medical visits before  basic  training  saying  he  had  a
clean bill of health.

He was later told by medical professionals  that  hyperthyroidism  could  be
treated and that it was not a disqualifying condition for military  service;
however, he could not be treated because it was  considered  a  pre-existing
condition.  If treatment was provided to him, he  could  not  be  discharged
for it.  Since it was a pre-existing condition, he was placed in  a  medical
holding  status,  without  treatment  for   his   hyperthyroidism,   pending
discharge actions.

The conditions of the medical hold unit were substandard and he  was  unable
to seek assistance from a civilian medical facility.

He  became  very  ill  and  suffered  a  complete  system  shut-down  before
treatment was provided. Due to bureaucracy,  he  almost  died.  Furthermore,
with the administration of medication,  he  should  have  been  returned  to
training instead of being discharged.

He states, “Even Prisoner’s of War get medical care which was only given  to
him when his life was seriously  threatened.”  The  lack  of  treatment  has
resulted in long-term health problems.

He has had his  thyroid  treated  with  radioactive  iodine  but  lab  tests
suggest he may have a Hepatitis condition which was  not  present  prior  to
reporting to Lackland.  It is not possible at this time  to  ascertain  what
additional long-term medical problems will result from being denied  medical
treatment which culminated in a complete system shut down of his body.

In support of his request, the applicant provided a copy  of  his  DD  Forms
4/1, Enlistment/Reenlistment Document – Armed Forces of the  United  States,
medical documentation, extracts of his discharge package, a copy of  his  DD
Form 214, results of a recent blood test, and a statement  of  facts  giving
his account of his military service and medical issues.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant entered the active duty Air Force on 7 Feb 06.  He served  for
a period of 3 months and 11 days.

On 11 Apr 06, the applicant’s commander notified him  of  pending  discharge
action for an erroneous enlistment.  Specifically, a medical  summary  dated
14 Mar 06, indicated the applicant did not meet  minimum  medical  standards
to enlist because of Graves Disease-Hyperthyroidism.

The applicant acknowledged receipt of  the  notification  of  discharge  and
waived his right to consult with legal counsel.  He submitted statements  in
his own behalf and requested a medical discharge.

On 13  Apr  06,  the  base  legal  office  found  the  case  to  be  legally
sufficient.

On 19 May 06, the discharge authority approved  the  applicant’s  separation
and  directed  he  be  discharged  with   an   uncharacterized   entry-level
separation.

The applicant  was  discharged with an entry-level  separation   on  17  May
06.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPD recommends denial of the request.  The preponderance  of  evidence
reflects that the Physical Evaluation Division never received a referral  to
the Physical Evaluation Board and;  therefore,  could  not  have  given  the
applicant a medical discharge.

The AFPC/DPPD complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial of the request.  Based on the documentation  in
the  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.

Airman   are   given    entry-level    separation/uncharacterized    service
characterization  when  separation  is  initiated  in  the  first  180  days
continuous active service.  The Department of Defense (DoD) determined  that
if a member served less than 180 days continuous active  service,  it  would
be unfair to the member  and  the  service  to  characterize  their  limited
service.  Therefore, his uncharacterized character  of  service  is  correct
and in accordance with DoD and Air Force instructions.

The AFPC/DPPRS complete evaluation is at Exhibit D.

AFPC/JA recommends denial of the request.  At the  outset,  the  applicant’s
implication that the Air Force could not administratively discharge him  for
Graves Disease because he was not diagnosed with this condition  during  his
military entrance  processing  (MEPS)  physicals  is  without  merit.   This
argument was previously raised at the U.S. Court  of  Claims  in  Taylor  v.
U.S. — a case with similar facts to the  applicant’s—and  was  unsuccessful.
To the extent the MEPS doctors’ failure to diagnose the  Graves  Disease  is
somewhat tantamount to a de facto waiver of that condition—as the  applicant
implies—is misplaced.  The Air Force must not  be  bound  by  pre-enlistment
medical examinations which do not include  the  extensive  laboratory  tests
necessary to reveal whether a prospective member has a medical condition  as
uncommon as the applicant’s.  Instead, the Air Force  remains  unconstrained
to determine who is fit for military service  and  to  reject  or  discharge
those who are not.  It is well settled  that  “no  one  has  the  individual
right, constitutional or otherwise, to enlist in the Armed  Forces,  as  the
composition of those forces is  within  the  purview  of  Congress  and  the
Military.  It is equally established in the law that “enlisted personnel  in
the military service do not have  a  contractual  right  to  remain  in  the
service until the expiration of their enlistment terms.

Because the applicant’s Graves Disease existed prior to his entry on  active
duty, he is ineligible to receive the medical separation  that  he  requests
from the AFBCMR.  The DoD instruction governing the  administration  of  the
Disability   Evaluation   System   specifically    directs    administrative
separations in cases such as the applicant’s in  which  a  service  member’s
medical impairment is identified within 180 days of entry  on  active  duty,
the  medical  impairment  does  not  meet  accession  standards,  is  not  a
condition that is cause for a referral to a PEB, and there  was  no  service
aggravation of the impairment.

The  separation  authority’s  action  to  administratively   discharge   the
applicant from the Air Force for an erroneous enlistment under AFI  36-3208,
paragraph 5.14, was therefore the proper decision.

The AFPC/JA complete evaluation is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the  applicant  on  14
Sep 07 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this  office
has not received a response.

_________________________________________________________________

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 opinions and recommendations of the Air Force  offices  of  primary
responsibility and adopt their 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-2007-01336
in Executive Session on 24 October 2007, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

      Mr. Michael V. Barbino, Panel Chair
      Mr. James A. Wolffe, Member
      Ms. Lea Gallogly, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, w/atchs dated 19 Apr 07.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPPD, dated 25 Jul 07.
    Exhibit D.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 26 Jul 07.
    Exhibit E.  Memorandum, AFPC/JA, dated 7 Sep 07.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Sep 07.



                                   MICHAEL V. BARBINO
                                   Panel Chair