RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-01208
INDEX CODE: 110.02
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her honorable discharge from the Air National Guard (ANG) be corrected to
reflect that she was discharged for medical disability reasons.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
She was told that she was being medically discharged but was not. She was
injured while in basic military training and her condition was
misdiagnosed. She was discharged from the New Hampshire ANG and told that
the Department of Veteran’s Affairs (DVA) was responsible for her medical
care.
In support of her request applicant provided a physical examination
summary; physical therapy evaluations; her medical care billing history;
and, a pharmaceutical receipt.
Her complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the ANG on 19 Oct 98 and was progressively promoted
to the grade of senior airman, having assumed that grade effective and with
a date of rank of 15 Feb 00. Applicant was honorably discharged from the
ANG because of medical disqualification on 13 Dec 00. She had completed 2
years of satisfactory Federal service.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The BCMR Medical Consultant reviewed applicant’s request and recommends
denial. The consultant states that what is essential of an unfitting
condition that would warrant disability processing is that there be a
condition that renders the individual incapable of performing the duties of
his/her rank, grade, duty, or station. The stress of basic military
training, which caused her discomfort, did not prevent her from completing
that portion of training or the follow-on technical training. The finding
of disqualification in the ANG system identifies problems that preclude
mobilization and deployment participation, the essence of such military
duties, whereas someone on active duty might be allowed to continue while
awaiting permanent resolution of such problems(see Exhibit C).
The Chief Special Actions/BCMR Advisories, USAF Physical Disability
Division, AFPC/DPPD, reviewed applicant's request and recommends denial.
DPPD states that applicant's file confirmed that she was never referred to
or considered by the Air Force Disability Evaluation System. Her records
include a Line of Duty (LOD) determination reflecting that she sustained an
injury resulting in left hip pain while participating in a physical
conditioning program while at basic training. She was treated on several
occasions but was able to complete both basic training and technical
school. After returning to home station she received continued treatment
for recurring hip and lower abdominal pain. She was found medically
disqualified for worldwide duty by the ANG Surgeon General's office and was
subsequently discharged. Nothing in her records confirms her allegations
that she was advised that she would receive a medical discharge. Service-
connected medical conditions incurred, but not found unfitting while on
active duty are not compensated under Title 10, United Sates Code (USC).
However, the DVA may compensate prior service members for these conditions.
Her records indicate she is currently being compensated by the DVA (see
Exhibit D).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 6
Jul 01 for review and response within 30 days. As of this date, this
office has received no response.
_________________________________________________________________
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. Based on the available evidence
of record it appears that after completing her initial active duty
training, she was fit and able to perform her military duties, was released
from active duty, and returned to the Air National Guard (ANG). However,
during her tenure with the ANG, competent medical authority determined that
she was medically disqualified for worldwide duty and as a result, she was
subsequently discharged. Applicant requests that her discharge be corrected
to reflect that she was discharged for medical disability reasons. Had it
been determined that she was found unfit for continued military service
while performing her initial active duty training, which is a distinctively
separate issue, Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) processing would have been
appropriate. ANG members found not qualified for worldwide duty are either
discharged, or if circumstances warrant, are considered for assignment into
a position that is not worldwide assignable. We note her indication that
she was unwilling to cross-train to facilitate such assignment. Based on
the available documentation, we find no evidence of error in this case.
Other than her own assertions, we have seen no evidence by the applicant
which would lead us to believe that her discharge was contrary to the
provisions of law or policy. Therefore, in the absence of persuasive
evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to favorably consider 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 21 Aug 01, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. John L. Robuck, Panel Chair
Mr. Edward H. Parker, Member
Mr. Billy C. Baxter, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 13 May 01, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 1 Jun 01.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 26 Jun 01.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 6 Jul 01.
JOHN L. ROBUCK
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03182
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was allowed to transfer from active duty Air Force to the Air National Guard (ANG) with a medical condition that was incurred while on active duty. DPPD states that based on the preponderance of the available evidence it appears that the applicant was reasonably capable of performing his military duties as an AGE mechanic up until the time of his active duty discharge. We took notice of...
The Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant states there is absolutely no evidence to prove that the double- curve thoracic scoliosis, dislocated and fractured thoracic vertebra, and lumbar scoliosis with tilted vertebra were there prior to service. None of his Air Force physicals indicated any EPTS spinal conditions. Applicant provided another statement in which...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-03661
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-03291 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be set aside and she be given a disability retirement. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The discharge she received was...
Therefore, she should have been medically retired. Individuals who are pending retirement at the time they are referred for a physical disability evaluation enter the disability evaluation system under a rebuttal presumption that they are physically fit. The DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit D. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force Evaluations were forwarded to the applicant for review and response.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-02597
The Air Force Informal Physical Evaluations Board’s (IPEB) determination that she be discharged from active service in the Air National Guard with a 20 percent disability was in error because the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA), “[u]sing the same medical records and statements less than six months later,” rated her disability at 50 percent. The IPEB reviewed the request and determined that these two conditions, in and of themselves, are not unfitting conditions and therefore would not...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00154
The IPEB noted that since her medical condition was a result of an accident (injury) that was determined to be not in the line of duty, her medical condition was not compensable under the provisions of military disability law/policy. Even if the applicant’s tumor existed prior to the accident, there is a preponderance of evidence that supports the finding that the accident caused the hemorrhaging of the tumor. In the applicant's case, the Air Force considered her hypothyroidism,...
The processing of a military member through the military disability evaluation system is determined by a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) when the member is determined to be medically disqualified for continued military service. The Director of Personnel Program Management, ARPC/DPP, reviewed the case and states that to be eligible for Reserve retired pay under Title 10 USC, Section 12731 the applicant needs to complete at least 15 years, but less than 20 years of satisfactory service, with...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01056
The AFBCMR Medical Consultant stated that, at the time of separation from active duty with the Regular Air Force, the applicant’s left knee condition was not “unfitting” for continued active military service. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit F. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The additional advisory opinion is provided following review of the previous AFBCMR action granting the applicant...
If it had he would not have separated from the Air Force. DPPRR states that on page 30 of the applicant’s original package, it is clearly documented that in October 1990, the applicant was diagnosed with Sarcoidosis and in April 1994 with Hepatitis C. The BCMR Medical Consultant’s letter dated 13 August 2001 further states that the member was aware of his medical condition at the time of separation. The applicant’s medical records clearly show that he was diagnosed with “Hepatitis C” in...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-02618 INDEX CODE: 108.01 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Honorary Retired Reserve status be changed to a disability retirement and his records be corrected to show he was awarded the Purple Heart Medal. From this assessment, the Medical Consultant states that it would appear that the...