RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

      IN THE MATTER OF:            DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2008-00916
            INDEX CODE: 112.10
      XXXXXXX                     COUNSEL:  NONE
                                   HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_______________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  His reentry (RE) code of “2C” which  denotes  "Involuntarily  separated
with  an  honorable  discharge;   or   entry   level   separation   without
characterization of service” be changed.

2.  His narrative reason for separation "Erroneous Entry" be changed.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

At the time of his discharge he did not  understand  what  erroneous  entry
meant.  He did not wrongfully enter the military and has proof he never had
asthma and does not have it now.  He wants to  reenlist  in  the  Navy  and
needs his discharge corrected in order to serve his country.  The pulmonary
tests prove nothing is wrong with his lungs and he does  not  have  asthma.
He is more than qualified and is working with Navy recruiters.

In support of his request, the applicant submits  a  copy  of  a  pulmonary
report.

His complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on  22  September  2004  in  the
grade of airman basic.

On 10 March 2005, he was notified by his commander that he was  recommending
his discharge for  erroneous  enlistment.   The  specific  reason  for  this
action was he was diagnosed with asthma.  This condition  existed  prior  to
service and was not permanently aggravated by service.

On 10 March 2005, he was advised of his right to consult counsel and  submit
statements on his own behalf, given  the  opportunity  to  consult  military
legal counsel and notified that this action  may  result  in  his  discharge
from the Air Force with an entry-level separation.
On 18 March 2005, he was discharged  in  the  grade  of  airman  basic  with
uncharacterized service.

He served 5 months and 27 days on active duty.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial of  his  request  to  change  his  RE  code.
DPSOA states a review of  the  applicant's  records  reveals  his  commander
recommended his discharge for erroneous enlistment.  He waived his right  to
submit a statement and also waived  his  option  to  counsel.   On  17 March
2005, the discharge  authority  directed  his  discharge.   DPSOA  finds  no
evidence of error or injustice.  RE code “2C” is correct for  this  type  of
discharge.

The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit C.

HQ AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial of  his  request  to  change  his  narrative
reason for separation.  DPSOS states it is unclear  from  the  documentation
within the discharge  package  whether  the  applicant  was  diagnosed  with
asthma prior to entry onto active duty.  However, the  chronological  record
of medical care form indicates  he  did  not  see  a  civilian  provider  or
receive  treatment   for   asthma   prior   to   his   current   enlistment.
Notwithstanding the absence  of  pre-enlistment  documents,  the  basis  for
discharge under erroneous enlistment has been met.  The Air Force  took  the
appropriate action regardless of whether the Air Force had  prior  knowledge
of the pre-existing  medical  condition.   A  review  of  his  records  also
reveals he received  three  non-academic  letters  of  counseling  and  four
letters of reprimand.  Although the commander did not elect  to  pursue,  it
appears  there  was  sufficient  basis   for   discharge   for   entry-level
performance and conduct.  The applicant  claims  he  never  had  asthma  and
submits a pulmonary function  report  as  evidence  to  support  his  claim.
DPSOS defers to the Board or qualified medical professional  as  to  whether
the report provides merit to his  petition.  Airmen  are  given  entry-level
separation and uncharacterized service characterization when  separation  is
initiated  in  the  first  180  days  of  continuous  active  service.   The
Department of Defense (DoD) determined 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 complete DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit D.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the  applicant  on  1
August 2008 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this  date,  this
office has received no response (Exhibit E).

________________________________________________________________

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant  recommends  denial.   The  Medical  Consultant
states many individuals with a predisposition for asthma may not  be  aware
of the condition until subjected to certain physical  and/or  environmental
factors, e.g., sustained physical exertion, that otherwise would have  gone
unnoticed during the period predating an  individual's  entry  to  military
service.  This phenomenon is commonly encountered by  recruits  during  the
sustained running activities of  Basic  Military  Training,  although  many
attest to their participation in sports  activities  in  the  past  without
difficulty.  The record does not specifically  reflect  he  experienced  an
exercise-induced asthma attack during his military service;  it  remains  a
leading reason for an initial investigation of the condition.  In the  case
under review, his 79% drop in  FEV-1  (The  amount  of  air  that  you  can
forcibly blow out in one second)  following  introduction  of  methacholine
represents a significant reduction in respiratory function that, under  the
right set of circumstances, could place his life and  the  mission  of  his
organization in peril, if unable to gain prompt access to proper treatment.
  The  Medical  Consultant  finds  this  factor  a  particularly  important
consideration  under  the  austere  operational  conditions  and   physical
stressors confronting all members of today's deployable forces; sparing  no
particular military department, component, or duty title.  Although he  has
demonstrated a normal baseline respiratory function, which did  not  change
significantly following use of a bronchodilator, it cannot be inferred  his
functioning will remain normal upon exposure to a  particular  allergen  or
other circumstances.  Individuals who were found  unable  to  complete  the
requirements of military service due to  a  condition  discovered  so  soon
(less than 180 days) after entering military service, such  that  it  would
have disqualified the applicant for entry to military service were it known
sooner, are separated as an erroneous entry.  Such a designation is not  an
indictment upon his integrity or truthfulness at the time of his acceptance
into military service, but one that has been  validated  through  objective
testing and sound medical principles.

The complete Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit F.

________________________________________________________________


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the BCMR Medical  Consultant  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant on 13 June 2008 for review and comment within  30  days.   As  of
this date, this office has received no response (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 an error or injustice to  warrant  changing  his  RE  code  or
narrative reason  for  separation.   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 the BCMR Medical Consultant and adopt their rationale as
the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim  of
an error or injustice.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find
no compelling basis  to  recommend  granting  the  relief  sought  in  this
application.

4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been  shown
that a personal appearance with or without counsel will  materially  add  to
our understanding of the issues involved.   Therefore,  the  request  for  a
hearing is not favorably considered.

______________________________________________________________

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 the application.

_______________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered  Docket  Number  BC-2008-00916
in Executive Session on 16 September 2008, under the provisions of  AFI  36-
2603:




                 Mr.  Joseph D. Yount, Panel Chair
                 Mr.  Grover L. Dunn, Member
                 Mr.  Richard K. Hartley, Member

The following documentary evidence  pertaining  to  Docket  Number  BC-2008-
00916 was considered:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 1 February 2008, w/atch.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSOA, dated 14 March 2008.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSOS, dated 21 April 2008.
      Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 June 2008.
      Exhibit F.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant,  dated  28  July
2008.
      Exhibit G.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 August 2008.




                                   JOSEPH D. YOUNT
                                   Panel Chair