RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-04908

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED: NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Item 28, Narrative Reason for Separation, on her DD Form 214, 
Certificate of Discharge or Release from Active Duty, be changed 
from “erroneous entry – other” to “medical discharge - asthma.”  

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

1.  She was medically discharged from the Air Force after 
medical clearance testing for her permanent change of assignment 
(PCS) to Okinawa Air Base (AB) Japan revealed she had asthma.  

2.  She was two weeks away from purchasing her first home when 
she became aware that her DD Form 214 did not state that she was 
medically discharged.  It must be changed in order for her 
Department Veterans Affairs (DVA) home loan to be approved.  

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

1.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 
11 March 2003.  

2.  On 4 June 2003 the applicant was notified by her commander 
that he was recommending her for discharge from the Air Force 
under the provisions of AFPD 36-32 Military Retirements and 
Separations and AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of 
Airmen, Chapter 5, Section 5C, Defective Enlistments, paragraph 
5.14, Discharge for Erroneous Enlistment.  The specific reason 
for this action was: the Chronological Record of Medical Care, 
dated 19 May 2003, indicated that the applicant was diagnosed 
with Asthma.  It was determined that this condition existed 
prior to service and had not been permanently aggravated by 
service.  


3.  On 4 June 2003, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the 
notification of discharge and was advised of her right to 
consult counsel and submit a statement to the commander for 
consideration.  She waived her option to consult counsel and her 
right to submit a statement for consideration.  

4.  Subsequent to the file being found legally sufficient the 
discharge authority approved the recommendation and directed the 
applicant be separated with an entry level separation.  The 
applicant was discharged on 16 June 2003, and was credited with 
3 months and 6 days of active duty service.  

5.  On 8 January 2013, the applicant contacted the offices of 
her State Representative to Congress and requested assistance in 
pursuing the change of her DD Form 214.  

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

1.  AETC/SGPS recommends denial.  SGPS states that based on the 
documentation on file in the applicant’s records, they find the 
diagnoses made and the separation process was accomplished in 
accordance with established policy and administrative 
procedures.  

2.  They noted, from a review of the applicant’s records and 
medical notes from the Wilford Hall Medical Center (WHMC), that 
on 16 May 2003 she was seen at the clinic stating she had 
shortness of breath (SOB) when she slept flat, and sleeps on 4 
pillows.  They also observed she had a positive family history 
of asthma.  The applicant had a severe SOB episode on 
15 May 2003 while walking to class, and had to be transported by 
ambulance to WHMC.  She did not require any treatment on this 
occurrence, but was administered a histamine challenge test 
noting a positive result with a 38% change in FEV-1 at 2 mg of 
histamine.  She was diagnosed with asthma, which is 
disqualifying for military service.  She was prescribed 
Albuterol 2-4 puffs as needed and Flovent, 2 puffs twice a day.  
Based on the diagnosis she was processed for an entry level 
separation.  

The complete AETC/SGPS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

1.  AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial.  DPSOR states that based on 
the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the 
discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive 
requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the 
discretion of the discharge authority.  

2.  Although they are pleased that the applicant is apparently 
succeeding and coping well in her civilian capacity, it does not 
change the basis for which she was discharged from the Air 
Force.  The military environment is unique and stressors 
encountered in such an environment may not appear or surface 
when removed from the military environment.  The applicant 
should not have been allowed to join the Air Force because of 
asthma.  Had the Air Force known of this condition at the time 
of the applicant's enlistment, she would not have been allowed 
entry into the military.  

3.  The applicant's service characterization is correct as 
reflected on her DD Form 214.  Airmen are given Entry-level 
Separation/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, the narrative reason for 
separation and the uncharacterized character of service on her 
DD Form 214 is correct and in accordance with DoD and Air Force 
instructions.  

The complete AFPC/DPSOR 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).  To date, a response has not been received.  

________________________________________________________________

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, we agree with the opinions and 
recommendations of Air Force offices or 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 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 this application 
BC-2012-04908 in Executive Session on 11 July 2013, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

		, Panel Chair
      , Member
		, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 18 October 2012, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AETC/SGPS, dated 7 January 2013.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 10 January 2013
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 January 2013.




                                   
                                   Panel Chair



AFBCMR
1500 West Perimeter Road
Joint Base Andrews NAF Washington, MD 20762






Dear:

	Reference your application submitted under the provisions of AFI 36-2603 (Section 
1552, 10 USC), AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-04908. 

	After careful consideration of your application and military records, the Board 
determined that the evidence you presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or 
injustice.  Accordingly, the Board denied your application.

	You have the right to submit newly discovered relevant evidence for consideration by the 
Board.  In the absence of such additional evidence, a further review of your application is not 
possible.

	BY DIRECTION OF THE PANEL CHAIR




				                                   
				                                   Chief Examiner
				                                   Air Force Board for Correction
				                                   of Military Records

Attachment:
Record of Board Proceedings




 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
WASHINGTON, DC


Office of the Assistant Secretary