Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-00261
Original file (BC-2007-00261.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-00261
            INDEX CODE:  110.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment  eligibility  (RE)  code  “2Q”  (Personnel  medically
retired or discharged) be changed to allow  him  to  reenter  military
service.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He does not have asthma and has medical documentation to prove it.

In support of his appeal, applicant submitted a copy of his  DD  Form
214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, a personal
statement and medical documentation.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force (AF) on 11 Jun 97,  as
an airman basic for a period of four years.

On 3 May 04, the applicant was discharged  with  disability  severance
pay.  The applicant served on active duty for 6 years, 10  months  and
23 days on active duty.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted
from the applicant's medical records,  are  contained  in  the  letter
prepared by the AFBCMR Medical Consultant (Exhibit C).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The AFBCMR Medical  Consultant  recommends  the  requested  relief  be
denied.  The Medical Consultant states the applicant had no history of
asthma prior to entry into the Air Force. After an overseas PCS he had
several attacks of respiratory distress which  responded  to  standard
asthma medications.  Upon returning to CONUS, he had more episodes  of
respiratory distress, one of which required a visit to  the  Emergency
Room.  These respiratory attacks are  unpredictable  and  portend  the
possibility of a recurrence of asthma under adverse  conditions,  such
as those associated 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.  While the applicant  seems  to  be  doing
well at his current residence, he is not exposed to the  environmental
stressors often found at places where the Air Force might deploy.   As
a result, the nasal allergies found at home could significantly worsen
in remote locations.  The applicant had pulmonology  consultations  in
2001 and 2006 where asthma was not diagnosed, and one  in  2004  where
the pulmonologist felt that the condition did represent  asthma.   The
preponderance of evidence of the record  shows  that  the  applicant's
condition posed a continued significant risk to the applicant and  the
Air Force mission and a medical discharge with severance pay  was  the
appropriate course of action.

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the  applicant  on
17 Aug 07, for review and comment within 30 days.  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.   Applicant’s
contentions are duly noted; however, we are not  persuaded  that  the
applicant has been the victim of an error or injustice.  At the  time
members are separated from the Air Force, they are  furnished  an  RE
code predicated upon the quality of their service  and  circumstances
of their separation.  After a thorough  review  of  the  evidence  of
record, we believe  that  given  the  circumstances  surrounding  the
applicant’s separation, the RE code issued was in accordance with the
appropriate directives.  Although the applicant appears to  be  doing
well, no evidence has been provided to indicate his medical condition
could tolerate the stressors of a military  environment.   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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2007-00261 in Executive Session on 3 Jan 08, under the provisions  of
AFI 36-2603:

                          Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
                          Mr. Joseph D. Yount, Member
                          Ms. Teri G. Spoutz, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 22 Jan 07.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, dated
                 16 Aug 07.
      Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Aug 07.




                       MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
                       Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03266

    Original file (BC-2006-03266.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The AFBCMR Medical Consultant advises that no change in the applicant’s records is warranted. 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. A review of the applicant’s military medical records shows that he had a history of asthma...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2003-02027

    Original file (BC-2003-02027.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The complete Medical Consultant's evaluation is at Exhibit R. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant believes he proves that he was returned to active duty on an AGR tour, he also included proof that he reenlisted and joined the Air Force (without a waiver) under a prior service program on 5 April 2006. He is still in the Air Force on full active duty. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03280

    Original file (BC-2006-03280.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 13 September 2006, the applicant’s commander recommended the applicant’s discharge for erroneous enlistment. The BCMR Medical Consultant states the evidence of record shows the applicant’s conditions, back pain and asthma, were appropriately managed and his Entry Level Separation was appropriate. The BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01960

    Original file (BC-2010-01960.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    DPSD states the evidence reveals no error or injustice occurred during the disability process or at the time of separation. 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 Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our decision the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of proof of the existence of an error or injustice. Exhibit E. Letter,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03941

    Original file (BC-2007-03941.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In a letter dated 17 Jan 08, the applicant was notified of a change to her RE code from 3A to 2Q (Personnel medically retired or discharged) and issued a DD Form 215, Correction to DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force and the BCMR Medical Consultant at Exhibits C, D and F,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-1997-03689-2

    Original file (BC-1997-03689-2.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    His medical condition has changed and improved since his last evaluation by the Air Force in March 1996. The ROTC cadet command referred back to his original Medical Evaluation Board ruling without consideration of his improved condition. The BCMR Medical Consultant notes that while the applicant reports he has improved his exercise tolerance, asthma is a condition that can remain symptom free over extended periods (as evidenced by his recurrence of asthma on active duty after over 10...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03087

    Original file (BC-2005-03087.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-03087 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 11 APRIL 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code “4C” be changed to allow him to reenter military service. On 23 August 1995, the MEB reviewed the clinical evidence and recommended...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00052

    Original file (BC-2007-00052.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00052 INDEX CODE: 110.00 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 8 July 2008 ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reentry Code (RE) of “2C” be changed to allow him to re-enter military service. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-00457

    Original file (BC-2005-00457.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00457 INDEX NUMBER: 145.00 XXXXXXXXXXXXx COUNSEL: None XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: No MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 7 Aug 07 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her entry level separation for “Erroneous Entry” be changed to “disabled.” _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0100996

    Original file (0100996.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board consequently found the member unfit for military service for his condition of asthma and recommended he be discharged with severance pay with a 10 percent disability rating. The evidence of record indicates that the applicant was honorably discharged by reason of physical disability, with entitlement to severance pay after being diagnosed with asthma. We took note of the applicant’s requests that his records be corrected to show that he was not discharged by reason of...