RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-02637
INDEX CODE: 108.01
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: Not Indicated
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His records be corrected to reflect that he was discharged for medical
reasons.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was discharged for a medical condition that was not properly documented.
His medical records did not properly document a laceration injury to his
right eye and severe back pain he received as result of an accident. The
military medical records that have been provided to him do not provide
sufficient information about the injuries, which resulted in denial of his
service connected disability claim by the Department of Veterans Affairs
(DVA). He was hospitalized and placed in traction for a period of time and
was placed on light duty based on the injuries, until his discharge. His
records indicate "Myositis acute," however his severe back pain was never
diagnosed as Myositis during his period of active duty.
In support of his request applicant provided a copy of his DD Fm 214, Armed
Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge; a personal
statement, and extracts from his medical records. His complete submission,
with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 12 Jan 61. On 23 Feb 62, he
was notified by his commander of his intent to recommend that he be
discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39-16, Section B,
and provided a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The
specific reason for this action was his attitude and inability to adapt to
the ways of the Air Force. On 5 Mar 62, the applicant was interviewed by a
discharge Evaluation Officer who recommended that he be honorably
discharged from the Air Force. The applicant elected not to submit a
statement on his own behalf. On 9 Mar 62, applicant was discharged from
the Air Force and furnished an Honorable Discharge certificate. He served
1 year, 1 month, and 28 days on active duty.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPD, reviewed applicant's request and recommends denial. DPPD states
that his contention that he was never properly informed of the reason for
his discharge is contradicted in a letter from his unit commander, which
clearly reflects his proposed action for an administrative discharge. A
statement from him, dated 5 Mar 62, acknowledges receipt of the ongoing
administrative action and his election not to submit a statement on his own
behalf. A medical examination completed on 24 Feb 62 for the purpose of
his administrative discharge revealed no significant findings and indicates
no severe or chronic medical problems existed at that time. Comments also
stipulate the examination found no mention of back problems, which may have
warranted action under disability evaluation system. He has provided no
material of documentation to show an inadequacy in his medical or personnel
records that would require inclusion of non-existent medical data or
correction of his administrative discharge. The DPPD evaluation is at
Exhibit C.
The BCMR Medical Consultant reviewed applicant's request and recommends
denial. The Medical Consultant states that while it is true he was briefly
hospitalized with "acute myositis," an inflammatory muscular soreness in
his lower back, he was not diagnosed with any condition that would have
warranted consideration in the disability system and his discharge physical
examination on 23 Feb 62 found him qualified for duty or separation. He
has been treated for a disc herniation in his lumbar spine since his
discharge, but this was not a diagnosis while on active duty. The Medical
Consultant Evaluation is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Applicant responded and states that there is no limit as to when a veteran
can file a medical claim. He was discharged because of a weight management
problem and a lower back condition, which was the result of an automobile
accident. During his discharge processing, none of his rights were
explained to him. He is not privileged to any information concerning
inaptitude and failure to progress. He doesn't recall having any problems
at work or with those he worked with. He and the DAV found numerous
inconsistencies within his medical records, which include, missing dates,
missing times, and hospital visits were incorrect. He has lived with
unnecessary discomfort and pain due to the error in his type of discharge
and improper guidance the military has provided. In further support of his
request, applicant provided a personal statement. His complete submission,
with attachments, is at Exhibit F.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or
regulations.
2. The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of
justice to excuse the failure to timely file.
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 are not persuaded by the evidence provided that the reason and authority
for his discharge from the Air Force were inappropriate or erroneous. We
see no evidence which would lead us to believe that a physical disability
existed at the time of his separation that would have disqualified him from
worldwide military service. Therefore, since there were no disqualifying
medical conditions at the time of his separation, we see no reason why he
would have been eligible for consideration in the disability evaluation
system. In the absence of persuasive 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 Docket Number 01-02637 in
Executive Session on 10 Apr 02, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
Mr. Albert F. Lowas, Jr., Member
Ms. Carolyn B. Willis, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 5 Sep 01, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 28 Jan 02.
Exhibit D. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 28 Dec 01.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 Feb 02.
Exhibit F. Letter, Applicant, dated 14 Feb 02. w/atchs.
CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02637
The available records do not reflect that he reported any history of foot pain or flat feet while he was on active duty in the Air Force. The Consultant further notes that service medical records for the period the applicant was on active duty in the Army (1988-1989) contain no entries for foot pain except on his Army separation physical exam. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2002-02637
The available records do not reflect that he reported any history of foot pain or flat feet while he was on active duty in the Air Force. The Consultant further notes that service medical records for the period the applicant was on active duty in the Army (1988-1989) contain no entries for foot pain except on his Army separation physical exam. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented...
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 | CY2002 | BC-2002-01544
The remaining 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 at Exhibits C and D. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends the application be denied. There is no evidence in the record that shoulder pain interfered with performance of military duty or made him unfit for duty...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2001-02189
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: At the recommendation of her physician, a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) reviewed the applicant's medical history and recommended that her case be forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) for disability consideration. The Record of Proceedings, with attachments, is at Exhibit H. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPD states that pursuant...
The AFPC/JA evaluation is at Exhibit L. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant's counsel reiterated his previous assertions and states that he disagrees with DPPD and JA that the applicant did not provide any new evidence. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Counsel reviewed the additional advisory and provided a response which...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03444
The member requested a hearing with the Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB). The SAFPC reviewed the findings of both Boards and concurred with the recommendation of the FPEB for discharge with severance pay at a 20 percent disability rating. The DPPD complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 9 Nov 07, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03324
The applicant was notified of his right to consult legal counsel, present his case to an administrative discharge board, be represented by legal counsel at a board hearing, and to submit statements in his own behalf, in addition to, or in lieu of the board hearing. On 19 Feb 85, the combat support group commander directed that a discharge board be scheduled to consider the applicant’s recommended discharge. On 24 Apr 85, the combat support group staff judge advocate performed a second...
Additional guidelines state that military members discharged from the service for a physical disability, which existed prior to service and not aggravated by active duty service, are not entitled to receive disability retirement or severance pay. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit E. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 16 February...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01041
On 6 Jul 72, the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council approved the recommendation and directed his discharge with severance pay. His lumbar back pain was unfitting for military service and was properly rated at the time and there is no evidence in his service medical records to support a higher rating at the time of discharge. The complete Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...