Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04516
Original file (BC-2012-04516.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:			DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-04516

					COUNSEL: NONE

					HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code 6P (medically 
disqualified/pending waiver) be changed to allow him to reenter 
the service.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was misdiagnosed with Asthma and subsequently discharged for 
a condition that he does not have.  He would like his RE code 
updated so that he can reenter the military.

In support of his request, the applicant submits a physician’s 
note and a medical report.

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is a former member of the Air National Guard who 
served from 31 May 2002 through 10 July 2010.  His service was 
characterized as honorable.  His narrative reason for separation 
is listed as insufficient retainability for mobilization or 
ineligibility for worldwide deployment and his RE code is 6P.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

NGB/SGPF recommends denial.  The applicant was medically 
disqualified for worldwide duty on 7 April 2010 for a non-duty 
medical condition of asthma, unspecified - treated with 
albuterol inhaler and ventolin.  In accordance with AFI 48-123, 
Medical Examinations and Standards, asthma, recurrent 
bronchospasm, or reactive airway disease is potentially 
disqualifying and/or precludes continued military service if the 
condition interferes with the individual’s ability to deploy or 
perform duties consistent with their rank, Air Force specialty 
code, or duty position.  

Chapter 13 of this regulation speaks to Mobility Status and 
Deployment Criteria.  It states mobility status is an ongoing 
condition where the member is free from any chronic medical 
condition or limitation other than temporary limitations, under 
one year, that would preclude deployment or temporary duty (TDY) 
for six months in field conditions.  A fitness for deployment 
determination is an assessment of a current medical condition.  
A deployment is defined as any TDY where contingency, exercise, 
and deployment TDY orders are issued and the TDY location is 
outside the United States.  ANG deployments are greater than 
30 days regardless of location.  Conditions which may seriously 
compromise the near-term well-being if an individual were to 
deploy are disqualifying for mobility status or deployment duty.  
Medical evaluators must consider deciding whether an individual 
with a specific medical condition is deployable.  A member must 
be able to able to perform duty in austere environments with no 
specific food, billeting, medical or equipment support for up to 
179 days.

The applicant’s medical records indicate he was diagnosed with 
mild persistent asthma with symptoms triggered by exercise, 
exposure to smoke and humid weather.  Dusty environments may 
also worsen his symptoms.  A pulmonology consult noted shortness 
of breath with exercise, cold air and dust exposure.  The 
applicant did not appeal the worldwide duty disqualification 
determination.  

If the applicant desires reentry, he may submit an accession 
physical examination and request a waiver for the significant 
medical history through a recruiter.

The complete SGPF evaluation is at Exhibit C.

NGB/A1P concurs with the subject matter’s advisory and 
recommends denial.  An internal review of the applicant’s 
medical records supports his disqualification from worldwide 
duty.

The complete A1P evaluation is at Exhibit D.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the 
applicant on 21 January 2013, for review and comment within 
30 days (Exhibit E).  As of this date, this office has received 
no 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 are not persuaded by the evidence 
submitted in the appeal that a change in his RE code is 
warranted.  Therefore, we agree with the opinion and 
recommendation of the NGB/SGPF 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 basis to disturb the 
existing record.

________________________________________________________________

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-2012-04516 in Executive Session on 27 June 2013 under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 26 Sep 12, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, NGB/SGPF, dated 26 Dec 12.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, NGB/A1P, dated 11 Jan 13.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Jan 13.



								
									Panel Chair

3

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01608

    Original file (BC 2013 01608.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01608 XXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His discharge be changed to a medical retirement with the associated back pay. In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of medical documents, orders, a letter written by the XXXX Space Operations Squadron commander dated 26 March 2013, stating the applicant should have been allowed to...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-01911

    Original file (BC-2012-01911.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    At the time she was discharged she had no idea that she was permanently disqualified from reentering a military service. The medical discharge is a false representation of her service in the Air National Guard (ANG). The complete A1PP evaluation is at Exhibit F. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 20 Dec 12 for review and comment within 30 days.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04598

    Original file (BC-2011-04598.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The mental health evaluation found the applicant as having an Adjustment Disorder (“Axis I: No diagnosis”). His diagnosis, by itself, does not automatically disqualify him from flight duties, although it cannot be determined if the Axis II diagnosis of personality trait affects him sufficiently that he cannot qualify to fly military aircraft. Further, the applicant did not have a medical condition that disqualified him from flight duties as an aviator, as noted by the BCMR Medical Advisor.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03304

    Original file (BC-2011-03304.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She should have been discharged via a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) and should have received disability compensation given the severity of her medical conditions. The complete SGPF evaluation is at Exhibit B. NGB/A1PS concurs with the SGPF’s advisory and therefore recommends no action be taken unless the applicant can provide documentation showing her medical conditions were deemed service connected...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03663

    Original file (BC-2012-03663.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03663 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His regular Reserve retirement be changed to disability/medical retirement. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03451

    Original file (BC-2011-03451.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    ________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: NGB/A1PS recommends his NGB Form 22 be changed to reflect a medical separation and denial of a change to the RE code. The complete NGB/A1PS evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant/counsel on 18 Nov 11 for review and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02498

    Original file (BC-2011-02498.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant's complete response is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR medical Consultant recommends denial of the applicant’s request to change the record to reflect that he was medically retired. The Medical Consultant found no nexus between the applicant’s ILOD injury of 1999 and his chronic lumbar condition, and noted a lack of evidence to demonstrate a chronic impediment to duty specifically due to...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01157

    Original file (BC-2013-01157.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 18 May 2011, NGB/A1PS found the applicant medically disqualified for worldwide duty for sleep apnea and requested a fitness evaluation. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: NGB/SGPA recommends denial of the applicant’s request for a medical retirement. Furthermore, the applicant was diagnosed with fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue syndrome in 2010 by the DVA but there is no documentation to support any service connected aggravation.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00593

    Original file (BC-2011-00593.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00593 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His medical condition (Essential Tremor) be found to be in the Line of Duty (INLOD) and/or service-connected. The applicant’s unit conducted a World Wide Duty Evaluation (WWDE) and he was disqualified from WWD, due to the implant of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01096

    Original file (BC-2002-01096.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The MEB referred him to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB). _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief Medical Consultant, AFBCMR, states the Air Force medical standards regarding asthma are very strict, and even mild asthma is a disqualifying condition for continued service, even if it does not directly interfere with the individuals work performance. ROBERT S. BOYD Panel Chair AFBCMR BC-2002-01096 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF...