RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:            DOCKET NUMBER:  00-03291
                 INDEX CODE:  110.00
                 COUNSEL:  NONE

                 HEARING DESIRED:  NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His  involuntary  administrative  general  (under   honorable   conditions)
discharge be set aside and he be given a disability retirement.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Increasing problems with back pain led to his discharge.

In support of his request, the applicant submits  a  copy  of  the  Veterans
Administration medical report and rating decision (Exhibit A).

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant contracted his initial enlistment in the Regular Air Force  on
18 April 1996.  In  January  1997  the  applicant  reportedly  fell  on  ice
sustaining a low back injury.  After  numerous  clinic  and  emergency  room
visits, he was referred to a specialist  who  performed  two  laminectomies,
one in November 1998 and another in February 1999.  After the surgeries,  he
was further treated with physical  therapy  and  pain  clinic  interventions
with little or no relief from his reported ongoing pain  symptoms.   Reports
from the specialist treating the applicant indicated little in  the  way  of
objective evidence of organic causes for his residual  and  lingering  pain,
but did indicate scaring from the surgeries may contribute to  some  of  his
ongoing pain.  A Medical Evaluation Board  (MEB)  was  conducted  in  August
1999 with referral to the Informal Physical  Evaluation  Board  (IPEB).   On
November 29,1999, the IPEB recommended the applicant be returned to duty  in
light of the lack of objective cause for the  continuing  problems  and  the
feeling  that  optimal  resolution  had  not   been   reached   because   of
“conflicting symptomatology.”

During the same two-year period (1997-1999)  the  applicant  received  three
Letters of Counseling (LOC) for Failure to go, three  Letters  of  Reprimand
(LOR) for Failure to go, Domestic Assault, and False Official  Statement  to
the OSI, an Article 15 for failure to go and disobeying a lawful  order  and
another for failure to go and dereliction of  duty.   On  19  May  1999  his
commander  denied  him  the  right  to  reenlist  and  he  acknowledge   his
nonselection for reenlistment on 4 June 1999.

On 20 September 1999 his  commander  recommended  him  for  discharge.   The
applicant was informed of his right to submit matters  in  response  to  the
discharge action.  In response, the applicant indicated that  he  attributed
the history  of  his  conduct  leading  to  his  discharge  to  his  medical
condition and requested his service be characterized as honorable.  A  legal
review  of  the  discharge  action  was  conducted  on  21  September   1999
concurring with  the  recommendation  to  discharge  the  applicant  with  a
general discharge without probation and  rehabilitation  for  a  pattern  of
misconduct.  The discharge authority  approved  the  recommended  separation
and directed that the applicant  be  discharged  with  a  general  discharge
without the offer  of  probation  and  rehabilitation.   The  applicant  was
administratively  separated  and  received  a   general   (under   honorable
conditions) discharge on 3  December  1999.   He  was  credited  with  three
years, seven months and sixteen days of active federal military  service  on
his initial four-year enlistment.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant states a Medical Evaluation Board was  conducted
on 17 August 1999 with referral to the Informal  Physical  Evaluation  Board
who, on 29 November 1999, recommended the member be  returned  to  duty  for
further observation and care.  Being found fit for return to duty is a  non-
contestable decision from the Disability Evaluation  System,  and  therefore
the member was not eligible for disability  separation  consideration.   The
evidence  of  record  establishes  beyond  all  reasonable  doubt  that  the
applicant was properly evaluated, had no  ratable  conditions  and  that  no
error or injustice occurred in his case.  Therefore, the Medical  Consultant
is of the opinion that no  change  in  the  records  is  warranted  and  the
application should be denied (Exhibit C).

The Physical Disabilities Division, AFPC/DPPD, indicated that  a  review  of
the applicant’s disability records reveals that he was presented before  and
MEB and IPEB and  found  fit  for  return  to  duty.   His  medical  records
indicated he was still being treated and evaluated for his lower  back  pain
and  his  condition  was  not  considered  unfitting  at  the  time  of  his
involuntary administrative discharge.  A thorough review of  the  case  file
revealed  no  discrepancies  during  the  member’s  processing  through  the
military disability evaluation system.  The records clearly reflect  he  was
properly  evaluated  under  federal  disability  guidelines   and   military
disability laws and policy at the time of his MEB/PEB.   The  applicant  has
not submitted any material  or  documentation  to  show  he  was  improperly
evaluated or processed under the provisions of military disability and  laws
that would qualify him for a disability retirement under the  provisions  of
Chapter 61, Title 10,  USC.   Therefore,  DPPD  recommends  the  applicant’s
request be denied (Exhibit D).

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force Evaluations were  forwarded  to  the  applicant  for
review and response.  As of this date, this office has received no  response
(Exhibit E).

___________________________________________________________________

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.   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  Air  Force  office  of
primary responsibility and  adopt  this  rationale  as  the  basis  for  our
conclusion that the applicant has  not  been  the  victim  of  an  error  or
injustice.  In this respect, based on the evidence  of  record,  it  appears
that the applicant was being treated and evaluated for his lower  back  pain
and  his  condition  was  not  considered  unfitting  at  the  time  of  his
involuntary  administrative  discharge.   While  we  sympathize   with   the
applicant and wish him well, 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 July 19, 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Vice Chair
      Mr. Steven A. Shaw, Member
      Ms. Barbara J. White-Olson, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 2 Feb 01.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 30 Mar 01.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 20 Apr 01.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 4 May 01.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Vice Chair