RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

 AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-00430 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: YES 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

Her records be corrected to show she received a line of duty (LOD) 
determination for mitral stenosis and atrial fibrillation and she 
was medically retired from the Air National Guard (ANG) with a 
disability rating of 50 percent, retroactive to November 1989, 
rather than discharged for medical disqualification. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

She was wrongly discharged for medical disqualification from the 
Minnesota ANG (MNANG) on 1 Nov 89. 

 

She underwent surgery for mitral stenosis in Apr 89 resulting in 
her mitral valve being replaced. As a result, she was placed on a 
life-long blood thinning medication. 

 

There was no record of a heart condition prior to her enlistment 
in the Regular Air Force in Apr 73. Mitral stenosis was diagnosed 
just prior to her discharge from active duty in Jan 77 indicating 
it occurred while she was on active duty. She was accepted for 
service with the Minnesota ANG (MNANG) in Apr 80 and was selected 
for a fulltime military technician position with the MNANG in Sep 
80. 

 

Therefore, her condition presented itself while she was on active 
duty and was obviously aggravated by service with the MNANG. 
During her discharge processing for medical disqualification, she 
was told that because she had not served for at least 15 years 
that she was not eligible for any type of retirement. She should 
have received an LOD and been evaluated for a medical retirement 
as she lost both her military and civilian careers as a result of 
her discharge. 

 

In support of her appeal, the applicant provides a personal 
statement and pertinent copies of her enlistment/reenlistment 
paperwork, medical records, and personnel records. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 


STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 27 Apr 73, and was 
progressively promoted to the grade of sergeant (E4) with a date 
of rank (DOR) of 1 Feb 76. She was honorably discharged on 31 Jan 
77 after having served three years, nine months, and four days. 

 

She enlisted with the MNANG on 19 Apr 80 for a period of one year. 
Evidence of record with regard to her enlistment on 19 Apr 80 
includes a Report of Medical Examination upon which is noted a 
problem with her heart. Also included is a Report of Medical 
History, where the applicant denies heart trouble of any kind. On 
5 Mar 81, she extended her enlistment for a period of three years. 

 

On 19 Apr 84, she reenlisted with the MNANG for a period of three 
years. Prior to her reenlistment, on 19 Feb 84, the evidence of 
record indicates the results of a Pulmonary Function Studies and 
an Electrocardiogram both as being normal. A Report of Medical 
Examination, dated 22 Jan 84, indicates a slight mitral stenosis, 
probably due to rheumatic fever, noting the applicant had no 
memory of ever having Rheumatic Fever. 

 

On 19 Apr 87, she requested an extension to her 1984 reenlistment 
of three years. Her request was approved extending her date of 
separation (DOS) to 18 Apr 90. 

 

On 6 Apr 89, she underwent surgery to replace her mitral valve 
with a prosthetic valve. The surgery required she take a blood-
thinning medication for the rest of her life. Attempts to 
regulate her heart rhythm were unsuccessful and she has been in 
atrial fibrillation since well before her surgery. 

 

On 15 Jul 89, she met a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) which 
ultimately found her medically disqualified for continued military 
service and recommended she be discharged. Her waiver request to 
remain on duty was denied. 

 

On 1 Nov 89, she was honorably discharged in the grade of master 
sergeant (MSgt/E7) after 13 years, 3 months, and 18 days of 
combined active and Reserve service. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

The BCMR Medical consultant recommends denial. He notes the lack 
of pertinent medical records with which to make an informed 
decision with regard to her claims. Nevertheless, based on the 
evidence of record provided by the applicant, the Medical 
Consultant identifies two medical maladies that require life-long 
medication and monitoring, yet neither condition can be classified 
as a potentially disqualifying condition. He therefore concludes 
the applicant has not met her burden of proving that an error or 
injustice occurred that would warrant a change to her record. 

 

The BCMR Medical Consultant’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit B. 


 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant 
on 22 Apr 10 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this 
date, no response has been received by this office. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 agree with the opinion and recommendation of 
the AFBCMR Medical Consultant and adopt his 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. 

 

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 issue(s) 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 this application. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number 
BC-2009-00430 in Executive Session on 22 June 2010, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 


The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2009-00430 was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 8 Jan 09, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. BCMR Medical Consultant dated 21 Apr 10. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 22 Apr 10. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair