RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

 AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00641 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His reason for separation (Erroneous Enlistment (Medical 
Conditions)) along with the corresponding Separation Program 
Designator (SPD) code of “J95” be changed; and that his 
Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) status of “Ineligible” be changed 
to “Eligible.” 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

His diagnosis of asthma that subsequently led to his separation 
was inaccurate. He does not have asthma. His Air Force medical 
records, from 2003 to 2005, showed no asthma but rather an acute 
sinusitis. He was treated and found fit for duty, passed all 
the tests; however, due to the write-up, he is unable to 
reenlist. 

 

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a copy of his 
NGB Form 22, NGB Report of Separation and Record of Service, 
issued in conjunction with his 19 May 06 separation and other 
supporting documents from his master personnel record. 

 

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

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant, a member of the Illinois Air National Guard, was 
separated under the provisions of AFI 36-3209, Separation and 
Retirement Procedures for the Air National Guard and Air Force 
Reserve, for an Erroneous Enlistment (Medical Condition). His 
service characterization was listed as entry level separation. 
He was credited with 3 years, 9 months, and 9 days, of service 
for pay. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

 

THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 


NGB/A1PS recommends denial. A1PS notes according to the NGB 
Form 22 provided, the applicant was separated in accordance with 
(IAW) AFI 36-3209, Separation and Retirement Procedures for Air 
National Guard and Air Force Reserve Members, with the reason 
listed as "Erroneous Enlistment (Medical Conditions).” This 
governing authority states that "A member may be discharged 
based on an erroneous enlistment, reenlistment, or extension of 
enlistment. An enlistment, reenlistment, or extension is 
erroneous if it should not have been accepted by the Air Force, 
but does not involve fraud. This separation is also 
characterized as an "Entry Level Separation" the definition of 
which can be found and described as "Discharge from entry level 
status without service characterization. This is complete 
severance from all military status gained by the enlistment or 
induction concerned." 

 

Based on both the reason and characterization the applicant 
should have been officially notified concerning the separation 
action. It appears that the applicant would 1ike to reenlist in 
the service, and is seeking the changes to his NGB 22 for that 
reason. While we can appreciate his desire to serve, almost 
eight years have passed since his original enlistment and five 
years have passed since his separation. 

 

Since the applicant should have had an opportunity to address 
these concerns and explore his options prior to separation and 
since no evidence to substantiate an error or injustice 
occurred, A1PS recommends disapproval of the applicant's 
request. 

 

The complete NGB/A1PS evaluation, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit C. 

 

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial, stating, in part, 
that the applicant has not supplied evidence that he has not 
required use of controller or rescue medications or experienced 
an acute exacerbation of his condition within the past three 
years. 

 

The applicant denies a history of asthma prior to enlistment. 
The reviewer is unable to verify the applicant's claim without 
adequate historical documentation. This is important because 
there is insufficient medical evidence to invalidate the reason 
for separation based upon erroneous enlistment (medical 
condition). The reviewer concedes there is evidence that the 
member was being treated for recurring sinusitis and allergic 
rhinitis of which either condition may accompany a diagnosis of 
asthma. The reviewer acknowledges comments included in the 
specialist progress notes question the diagnosis of asthma. 
However, progress notes acknowledge clinical improvement with 
use of a bronchodilator which is commonly used to treat 
bronchospasms associated with asthma. Furthermore, it is 
unclear whether the applicant continued use of the 
bronchodilator for symptomatic relief after being transferred 
back to the unit physician for basic training clearance. The 
matter of an abnormal methacholine challenge test (MCT) in 
2003 remains unresolved. There is no evidence that the MCT was 


repeated after treatment for sinusitis and allergic rhinitis to 
evaluate whether the abnormal result had resolved. In summary, 
based upon very limited medical evidence, there is insufficient 
evidence to clearly establish whether an error or injustice 
occurred regarding the diagnosis of asthma or whether the 
condition existed prior to entry into the military. Noting that 
six years have passed since the applicant's last pulmonary 
evaluation, the Consultant finds it inappropriate to recommend 
changing his re-entry code without more current clinical 
information to reflect the applicant health status. 

 

The complete BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit D. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

Copies of the Air Force evaluation were forwarded to the 
applicant on 5 Oct 11 for review and comment within 15 days. As 
of this date, no response has been received by this office 
(Exhibit E). 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 

 

1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by 
existing law or regulations. 

 

2. The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the 
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. 

 

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, the applicant’s case has undergone an 
exhaustive review by the National Guard Bureau office of primary 
responsibility and the BCMR Medical Consultant and we did not 
find the evidence provided, sufficient to overcome their 
assessment of the case. Therefore, we agree with their 
recommendations and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis 
for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his 
burden that he has suffered either an error or an injustice. In 
view of the above and in the absence of evidence to the 
contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief 
sought in this application. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: 

 

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the 
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2011-00641 in Executive Session on 3 November 2011, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 9 Feb 11, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, NGB/A1PS, dated 23 Mar 11, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, 

 dated 22 Sep 11. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 Oct 11. 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair