RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-01545
INDEX NUMBER:110.02
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her entry-level separation be changed to an honorable discharge and
that the Air Force compensate her for a magnetic resonance imaging
(MRI) procedure in order to determine if the condition existed prior
to service.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The reasons the applicant believes the records to be in error or
unjust and the evidence submitted in support of the appeal are at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the
applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by
the appropriate office of the Air Force. Accordingly, there is no
need to recite these facts in this Record of Proceedings.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The AFBCMR Medical Consultant, reviewed the application and
recommended denial.
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
The USAF Physical Disabilities Division, HQ AFPC/DPPD, reviewed the
application and recommended denial.
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on
20 October 2000 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). As
of this date, no response has been received by this office.
_________________________________________________________________
ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The BCMR Medical Consultant provided an additional review of the
applicant’s request in order to answer specific questions as to the
applicant’s preexisting medical condition.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the additional evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on
12 January 2001, for review and comment (Exhibit G). 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 probable error or injustice. After a very thorough
review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are
not persuaded that her records should be changed. Applicant’s
contentions are duly noted; however, we do not find these
uncorroborated assertions, in and by themselves, sufficiently
persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air Force.
Applicant has provided no persuasive evidence that her preexisting
medical condition was improperly rated and processed at the time of
her discharge or that the Air Force should compensate her for an MRI.
We therefore agree with the recommendations of the Air Force and adopt
the rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that the
applicant has failed to sustain her burden that she has suffered
either an error or an injustice. Therefore, in the absence of
evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling 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 probable 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 in
Executive Session on 13 December 2000 and 14 June 2001, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mrs. Barbara A. Westgate, Chair
Mr. Joseph A. Roj, Member
Ms. Marcia Bachman, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 31 May 00, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 11 Sep 00.
Exhibit D. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPD, dated 6 Oct 00.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 20 Oct 00, w/atchs.
Exhibit F. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 10 Jan 01.
Exhibit G. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 12 Jan 01.
BARBARA A. WESTGATE
Chair
The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force, which are a part of these proceedings at Exhibits C and D. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends the application be denied. The medical consultant states that the PEB knew the significance of all of the applicant’s medical...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03604
Title 38 USC governs the DVA compensation system in awarding disability percentage ratings for conditions that are not unfitting for military service. A complete copy of the BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPD states the medical disability evaluation system is used to determine if the servicemember’s medical condition renders him fit or unfit for continued military service. They further state that under military disability laws and policy, the boards...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-00344 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be reinstated in an Active Guard/Reserve (AGR) position retroactive to 24 July 1998, with back pay and allowances, and processed through the Air Force Disability Evaluation System (DES). The LOD form should be taken to the nearest active duty treatment facility so that a new Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) can...
In his 20 April 1998 appeal to the AFBCMR, the applicant requested his honorable discharge be changed to a medical disability discharge. Also provided was a statement from an individual who asserts he saw a drill instructor assault the applicant and “signed a police report on this matter in 1975 for the airforce police.” All of these letters, with their attachments, are at Exhibit I. A copy of the complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. The Chief, Physical Disability Division, HQ AFPC/DPPD,...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1998-01124
In his 20 April 1998 appeal to the AFBCMR, the applicant requested his honorable discharge be changed to a medical disability discharge. Also provided was a statement from an individual who asserts he saw a drill instructor assault the applicant and “signed a police report on this matter in 1975 for the airforce police.” All of these letters, with their attachments, are at Exhibit I. A copy of the complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. The Chief, Physical Disability Division, HQ AFPC/DPPD,...
The results of his latest MRI show that he has more than degenerative arthritis. In a 30 Jan 98 TDRL evaluation, an orthopedic surgeon noted the applicant had continued symptoms after the operation with no improvement in either his back or leg pain. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In his first letter, the applicant indicates he did agree with the findings of the...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00299
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: BC-2003-00299 INDEX CODE 108.01 108.10 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: Yes _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His 1968 honorable discharge for a disability that existed prior to service (EPTS) be changed to a medical discharge for a service- aggravated condition, and all statements alleging he denied a history of knee injury during...
On 30 Jan 98, the applicant was given an entry level separation from the Air National Guard and as a Reserve of the Air Force under the provisions of AFI 36-3209 (Erroneous Enlistment). After a thorough review of the available evidence, we are not persuaded that the applicant’s entry level separation based on the termination of her initial active duty training should be changed to a disability discharge. Therefore, we recommend that the applicant’s narrative reason for separation from the...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03095
On 6 March 2000, the applicant submitted her rebuttal letter to SAFPC requesting a disability retirement, with a compensable disability rating of 40 percent. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: The BCMR Medical Consultant summarized the information contained in the applicant’s personnel and medical records and is of the opinion that the preponderance of the evidence of the record supports a disability rating of 20 percent. A complete...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02827
The fact that a person may have a medical condition does not mean that the condition is unfitting for continued military service. In the medical Consultant’s view, the preponderance of evidence of the record shows that the applicant’s scoliosis condition existed prior to service, and that her back pain was the natural progression of the condition. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and recommendations...