ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 96-02343
INDEX NUMBER: 110.02, 108.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
__________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His separation for high year of tenure (HYT) be changed to a medical
retirement with a disability rating of 100%.
___________________________________________________________________
RESUME OF CASE:
A similar appeal was considered and denied by the AFBCMR on 24 April 1997
(Exhibits A through D).
By letter, dated 22 September 1997, the applicant stated he never
received the advisory opinion for review and comment (Exhibit E). A copy
of the advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant on 2 October 1997
(Exhibit F).
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Applicant stated that, in 1994, he suffered total body weakness,
shortness of breath, and disorientation. The medical treatment
facilities diagnosed his symptoms as dehydration and fatigue. After he
was discharged, he suffered a second episode with the same symptoms,
which was diagnosed as possible Myasthenia Gravis. This diagnosis was
later verified.
Had he been properly diagnosed in 1994, he would have been referred to a
Medical Evaluation Board and he would not have suffered the second
episode in 1996. Finally, he would not have had to suffer from December
1994 to February 1996 doing all he could to maintain a 5 EPR rating while
endangering his life.
Applicant’s response is at Exhibit G.
___________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
After careful review of the applicant’s complete submissions, the
majority of the Board found no evidence that applicant’s physical fitness
to perform his duties at the time of his separation was questionable.
The regulation governing disabilities defines unfitness as the inability
of a member to perform the duties of his/her office and grade in such a
manner as to reasonably fulfill the purpose of his/her employment on
active duty. Such a determination would have been required before the
applicant could be eligible for physical disability processing. The mere
presence of physical defects or conditions does not justify a finding of
unfitness. At the time of his separation, the applicant was considered
medically qualified for separation. Additionally, a review of the
applicant’s performance reports reflects that, until his separation, his
duty performance was outstanding. Based on the foregoing, and in the
absence of evidence showing that the applicant was medically unfit for
continued service within the meaning of AFI 36-3212, which implements the
law, or that he was improperly evaluated at the time of his separation, a
majority of the Board is unpersuaded that a revision of the Board’s
earlier determination is warranted.
___________________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD:
A majority of the panel finds insufficient evidence of error or injustice
and recommends the application be denied.
___________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered this application in
Executive Session on 30 September 1998, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. John L. Robuck, Panel Chair
Mr. Kenneth L. Reinertson, Member
Mr. Allen Beckett, Member
By a majority vote, the members voted to deny the request.
Mr. Reinertson voted to correct the record and did not desire to submit a
minority report. The following additional documentary evidence was
considered:
Exhibit E. Letter from Applicant, dated 22 Sep 97, w/atchs.
Exhibit F. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 2 Oct 97.
Exhibit G. Letter from Applicant, dated 24 Oct 97.
JOHN L. ROBUCK
Panel Chair
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD FOR
CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS (AFBCMR)
SUBJECT: AFBCMR Application of [APPLICANT]
I have carefully reviewed the evidence of record and the
recommendation of the Board members. A majority found that applicant had
not provided substantial evidence of error or injustice and recommended
the case be denied. I concur with that finding and their conclusion that
relief is not warranted. Accordingly, I accept their recommendation that
the application be denied.
Please advise the applicant accordingly.
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
By letter, dated 22 September 1997, the applicant stated he never received the advisory opinion for review and comment (Exhibit E). Applicant’s response is at Exhibit G. ___________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: After careful review of the applicant’s complete submissions, the majority of the Board found no evidence that applicant’s physical fitness to perform his duties at the time of his separation was questionable. JOHN L. ROBUCK Panel...
COUNSEL: None - RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 97-00144 AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS mol a$& HEARING DESIRED: No APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed to one that will allow reenlistment in the Air Force Reserve. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The AFBCMR Medical Consultant also evaluated this case and contends t h a t the evidence is inconclusive in supporting...
The discharge case file contains sufficient evidence to warrant recommending that the Air Force discharge applicant. On 19 September 1995, the Vice Commander, HQ AMC, recommended applicant be discharged with an honorable discharge and that his case be forwarded to the Air Force Personnel Board for further action. Applicant's case was forwarded to the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) for consideration of discharge under AFI 36-3206 (Administrative Discharge Procedures)...
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Master Records Management Division, ARPC/DSMO, reviewed this application and recommended denial, stating that, although the applicant has provided favorable communications from individuals not in his rating chain for the OPRs in question, they are not convinced by the evidence provided, that these reports do not accurately portray applicant's duty performance and should be removed from his record. If the Board disagrees, they recommended removal of the...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1998-00462
The relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the AFBCMR Medical Consultant (Exhibit C). This evaluation resulted in a diagnosis of “Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Anxiety and Depressed Mood.” She was recommended for involuntary separation under provisions of AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5.11.1, Mental Disorders. The Separation Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, stated that provided HQ AFPC/DPPD determines the applicant’s reason for separation should remain...
The relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the AFBCMR Medical Consultant (Exhibit C). This evaluation resulted in a diagnosis of “Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Anxiety and Depressed Mood.” She was recommended for involuntary separation under provisions of AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5.11.1, Mental Disorders. The Separation Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, stated that provided HQ AFPC/DPPD determines the applicant’s reason for separation should remain...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03206
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-03206 INDEX CODE: 110.02, 100.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His narrative reason for separation and reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed. The applicant developed symptoms of grief depressed mood while in technical training that was diagnosed as Adjustment Disorder with...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03206
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-03206 INDEX CODE: 110.02, 100.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His narrative reason for separation and reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed. The applicant developed symptoms of grief depressed mood while in technical training that was diagnosed as Adjustment Disorder with...
and Exhibit 1, provides the member be rated for each disability and disabling condition. In regard to the applicant's contention that the Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB) did not consider additional medical addendum and tests scheduled prior to the 24 July 1996 Board, it appears that even though the electrocochleography (ECOG) was not considered by the FPEB, they did consider the applicant's symptoms of chronic disequilibrium and found it not unfitting and, therefore, not ratable or...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03221
On this same date, military medical authorities reviewed his medical records and determined that a physical examination was not required. The BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 19 March 2004 for review and response. However, these factors, alone, do not substantiate that the applicant was unfit...