Okay. Hate to keep adding to the thread, but I have one more relevant question pertaining to this situation.
I read and then reread and then reread again the documentation from WrightPat on waiver policies. I have highlighted and attached the relevant two pages from the most up-to-date version I could find for your examination.
It seems like this documentation actually supports a waiver potential (by that I mean at least not permanently d'qued). Am I reading that right, or am I missing something? Is there a chance that, somehow, the medical board miscategorized my medical condition? It sure seems to me like it fits into the category of 'reversible risk factor', which has AETC waiver potential.
I have also looked at the overarching Dod instruction on medical standards and it makes no mention whatsoever of this Factor V Leiden.
I guess what I am getting at is this: is there a chance that there was a mistake on the AF's part? I mean, I hate to really bring that option up, but it does increasingly seem like that's what happened here. And no, I was not denied a waiver, I was told I had no potential for one. If I had a waiver potentially and it was denied, that would have been a different,understandable story.
Does any of that make sense? If not, I'll clarify what I'm trying to get at. Any feedback on this would be much appreciated.
I read and then reread and then reread again the documentation from WrightPat on waiver policies. I have highlighted and attached the relevant two pages from the most up-to-date version I could find for your examination.
It seems like this documentation actually supports a waiver potential (by that I mean at least not permanently d'qued). Am I reading that right, or am I missing something? Is there a chance that, somehow, the medical board miscategorized my medical condition? It sure seems to me like it fits into the category of 'reversible risk factor', which has AETC waiver potential.
I have also looked at the overarching Dod instruction on medical standards and it makes no mention whatsoever of this Factor V Leiden.
I guess what I am getting at is this: is there a chance that there was a mistake on the AF's part? I mean, I hate to really bring that option up, but it does increasingly seem like that's what happened here. And no, I was not denied a waiver, I was told I had no potential for one. If I had a waiver potentially and it was denied, that would have been a different,understandable story.
Does any of that make sense? If not, I'll clarify what I'm trying to get at. Any feedback on this would be much appreciated.