RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-02199
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be reinstated to active duty.
_________________________________________________________________
THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The medical condition for which he was discharged was proven false after
his discharge.
The applicant states that he was diagnosed with asthma; however, after he
separated, it was proven that the condition was a side effect of a
medication he was taking at the time. Proper procedures were not followed
during his Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). In addition, his request for
retainability and cross-training were denied.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 27 March 1996, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force for a
period of 4 years.
On 30 March 1999, a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) convened and recommended
the applicant be referred to an Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB)
based on the diagnosis of asthma, mild, persistent.
On 9 April 1999, an IPEB convened and based on the diagnosis of asthma,
mild, persistent, recommended the applicant be discharged with severance
pay, with a 10% disability rating. On 12 April 1999, the applicant agreed
with the findings of the IPEB and waived his right to a Formal Physical
Evaluation Board (FPEB).
On 13 April 1999, the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council
determined the applicant should be discharged with severance pay, with a
disability rating of 10%.
On 1 June 1999, the applicant was honorably discharged in the grade of
senior airman under the provisions of AFI 36-3212 (Disability, Severance
Pay).
On 28 September 2000, the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) awarded the
applicant an overall combined compensable disability rating of 30% (i.e.,
hypertension, lumbar strain with degenerative disc disease, asthma, and
heart damage).
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:
The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends the application be denied and
states, in part, that although the diagnosis of the applicant’s asthma
appears to have been made without the benefit of all possible information
and while he was taking a potentially contributing medication, there
remains the underlying problem of hypertension for which he continues to
require multiple medications to control. The applicant entered the
military with at least borderline problems which fully manifested
themselves within a very few months of entry. Based on the applicant’s
need for current multiple medications to control his problem, he is
rendered unfit for continued military service without regard to any
hypothetical diagnosis of asthma, and could well have been processed for
disability separation for that condition as well as the one for which he
was separated.
The BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C.
AFPC/DPPD recommends the applicant be allowed to apply for active duty
through an Air Force Military Entrance Processing Station (MEPS), where he
can be reexamined within military channels to determine if he can meet
current medical standards for active duty. The new medical evidence
provided by the applicant was presented to an IPEB for a second opinion.
The IPEB agreed that the new medical evidence may indicate a misdiagnosis
for Asthma; however, there is still the question about the applicant’s
current condition for hypertension, and how the stress of military service
could affect his overall fitness. The IPEB concluded that if the applicant
still wants to return to active duty, there is nothing to preclude him from
seeking entry on active duty via normal channels as a prior service
enlistee. It was determined that if he can meet current medical enlistment
standards, he should be allowed to return to active duty. The IPEB also
recommended that any reference to his asthma diagnosis remain within his
military medical records, in the event that he is returned to active duty
and the condition should reappear.
The AFPC/DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit D.
AFPC/DPPRS states that since the applicant has requested reinstatement due
to medical reasons, they will leave any recommendations to the medical
authorities. However, based upon the documentation in the file, the
applicant’s discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive
requirements of the discharge regulation. In addition, the discharge was
within the sound discretion of the discharge authority.
The AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit E.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:
Complete copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the
applicant on 15 November 2001 for review and response within 30 days.
However, 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 thorough review of the
evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that he
should be reinstated to active duty. Regardless of whether the applicant
was misdiagnosed with Asthma, based on his current condition for
Hypertension, and how the stress of military service could affect his
overall fitness, there remains reasonable doubt as to whether he meets
current medical standards for active duty. In view of this, we do not
believe he should be reinstated to active duty. However, the applicant may
apply for active duty through an Air Force Military Entrance Processing
Station (MEPS) where he can be reexamined within military channels to
determine if he meets current enlistment standards. Whether or not he is
successful will depend on the needs of the service and his ability to meet
medical standards.
_________________________________________________________________
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 17 January 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Philip Sheuerman, Panel Chair
Mr. Christopher Carey, Member
Mr. James Russell, III, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 25 Jul 01, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 6 Sep 01.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 3 Oct 01.
Exhibit E. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 19 Oct 01.
Exhibit F. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Nov 01.
PHILIP SHEUERMAN
Panel Chair
The Board consequently found the member unfit for military service for his condition of asthma and recommended he be discharged with severance pay with a 10 percent disability rating. The evidence of record indicates that the applicant was honorably discharged by reason of physical disability, with entitlement to severance pay after being diagnosed with asthma. We took note of the applicant’s requests that his records be corrected to show that he was not discharged by reason of...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01206
Subsequent to being evaluated by the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) and Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB), the applicant was released from active duty under the provisions of AFR 35-4 (Placed on Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL)). Following a period of observation and treatment on TDRL status, he was permanently disability retired on 12 Jun 1986, with a disability rating of 40 percent for his condition and received pay in the grade of colonel, with over 26 years...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03742
On 1 March 2001, an Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) determined he was unfit and recommended his placement on TDRL status with 30% disability. The DFAS evaluation is at Exhibit C. The BCMR Medical Consultant summarized the information contained in the applicant’s personnel and medical records and is of the opinion that no change in the records is warranted. We are not persuaded by the evidence presented that the applicant’s discharge from the Air Force because of physical...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03258
On 7 Oct 96, officials within the Office of the Secretary of the Air Force directed that he be removed from the TDRL and permanently retired with a 100 percent disability rating. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPD recommends denial of the applicant's request. The time spent on the TDRL is not considered active duty service and therefore, is not recorded on the DD Form 214.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01947
________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: AFPC/DPPD recommends the application be denied, and states, in part the applicant was processed through the Disability Evaluation System (DES) and was found unfit for continued military service based on asthma which existed prior to service. The applicant contends the determination that her asthma existed prior to her service was solely based on the single sentence in the MEB that she reported using an...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02663
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: BC-2002-02663 INDEX CODE 100.06 110.02 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Separation Program Designator (SPD) (narrative reason) and reenlistment eligibility (RE) codes for his 1999 entry-level separation be changed so he can reenlist. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02027
The BCMR Medical Consultant states that, although the applicant’s asthma may be mild, it has resulted in duty limitations that are not compatible with a fully fit and vital force and poses requirements that the Physical Evaluation Boards and Air Force Personnel Council previously determined to be unreasonable. The Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) reviewed the evidence and testimony presented by the FPEB and IPEB, including service medical record and the medical summary...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-01465 INDEX CODE: 110.00; 110.02 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: YES ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The narrative reason for his discharge, “Unsuitable-Personality Disorder-Board Waiver,” be removed from his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty; and that...
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...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-02456 INDEX CODE: 110.00; 110.02 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: YES ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2C (Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or, entry level separation without characterization of service) be changed; her separation code...