Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200025
Original file (0200025.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-00025
            INDEX NUMBER:  100.00
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to reflect that  he  incurred  a  service-connected
illness while on active duty and was medically discharged.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

While serving on active duty in the Panama Canal Zone  in  1975,  he  became
sick and still has to see doctors for his illness.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force for a period of  four  years
on 5 December 1973.

The applicant received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) on 4  December  1974  for
failing to report to  duty  on  28  November  1974,  after  sick  call.   An
Unfavorable Information File (UIF) was established on 9 December  1974,  and
a copy of the LOR filed therein.

The applicant was notified on 2 May  1977,  of  his  commander’s  intent  to
impose nonjudicial punishment under  Article  15  of  the  Uniform  Code  of
Military Justice (UCMJ) for violation of Article  134  (Conduct  Prejudicial
to Good Order  and  Discipline).   Specifically,  for  being  disorderly  in
station, on or about 19 April 1977, at Richards-Gebaur AFB,  Missouri.   The
applicant did not consult counsel, accepted the nonjudicial punishment,  and
did not submit oral or written matters to his commander  for  consideration.
The commander imposed the  nonjudicial  punishment  on  4  May  1977,  which
consisted of reduction to the grade of airman first class and forfeiture  of
$110.00.  However, the reduction in grade was suspended until 29 July  1977,
at which time it would be remitted without further action.

On 28 June 1977, the applicant  requested  voluntary  separation  under  the
Fiscal Year 1977 (FY77) Airman Voluntary Early Separation Program.

The applicant underwent a separation physical  on  15  August  1977,  during
which  he  denied  any  medical  problems  and  was  found   qualified   for
separation.

The  applicant  was  honorably  discharged  on  22  August  1977  under  the
provisions of AFR 39-10.  He completed 3 years, 8 months,  and  18  days  of
active service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

The Chief Medical Consultant, AFBCMR, recommends the application  be  denied
and states, in part, that  the  records  failed  to  show  any  evidence  of
chronic medical or  psychological  problems  that  would  have  brought  the
applicant to the attention of the Disability Evaluation  System  (DES),  and
his separation was completed without error or injustice.   Furthermore,  the
applicant has provided no documentation  from  the  Department  of  Veterans
Affairs (DVA) to indicate that he is being treated  for  any  problems.   No
evidence exists for any  service-connected  disorders  upon  which  to  base
favorable consideration.

The Chief Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPD recommends the application be denied and  states,  in  part,  that
the outcome  of  the  physical  examination  coupled  with  the  applicant’s
performance  reports  clearly  show  that  he  was  reasonably  capable   of
performing all assigned military duties right up until  his  discharge.   In
addition, during the completion of his medical history  statement  completed
at the time of his separation physical, he rated his health  as  good.   The
mere presence of a physical  defect  or  condition  does  not  automatically
qualify  an  individual  for  disability  retirement  or  separation.    The
physical defect or condition must render  the  member  unfit  for  continued
military service.  The applicant has not provided any evidence to show  that
he was unfit due to a physical disability.

The AFPC/DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations was forwarded to  the  applicant  on  22
March 2002 for review and comment within 30  days.   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 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  error  or  injustice.   We  took  notice  of  the  applicant's
complete submission in judging the merits of the  case;  however,  we  agree
with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force  offices  of  primary
responsibility and adopt their rationale as the  basis  for  our  conclusion
that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.   There
being insufficient evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis  to
recommend granting the relief sought.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented  did  not  demonstrate
the existence of 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  02-00025  in
Executive Session on 16 May 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                  Mr. Jackson A. Hauslein, Panel Chair
                  Ms. Diana Arnold, Member
                  Ms. Carolyn B. Willis, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 12 Dec 01, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 12 Feb 02.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 14 Mar 02.
      Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 Mar 02.




                                   JACKSON A. HAUSLEIN
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02078

    Original file (BC-2002-02078.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    His maximum weight by Air Force standards was 189 pounds. They indicated that the applicant received a physical examination on 16 July 1981 in conjunction with his involuntary discharge action for failing to meet Air Force Weight Control Program (WCP) standards. Further, we find no evidence in his records that his knee condition prevented him from meeting standards for Air Force weight management.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1998-00826

    Original file (BC-1998-00826.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Evaluation in the disability evaluation system should have followed where the most likely recommendation would have been unfit for duty. A complete copy of the Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C. The Physical Disability Division, AFPC/DPPD, reviewed this application and recommended denial. A complete copy of the DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9800826

    Original file (9800826.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The fact is, the applicant presented himself to mental health services during his period of service with apparently bonafide evidence of psychotic hallucinations/behavior and this was not considered in his discharge processing. A complete copy of the DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to applicant on 17 Aug 98 for review and response....

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00457

    Original file (BC-2004-00457.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 04-00457 INDEX NUMBER: 145.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His retirement order be changed to reflect that he received a non- disability retirement and that his AF Form 356, Findings and Recommended Disposition of USAF Physical Evaluation Board, Item 10c, be changed to read that his medical...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00058

    Original file (BC-2003-00058.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: When he was discharged from the service he was given a 10% disability rating due to malaria and drew $11.20 a month for two years. The applicant had no medical condition at the time of his separation from the military that warranted evaluation in the Air Force disability system. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0102398

    Original file (0102398.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ 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. The applicant has not submitted any documentation to show that he was unfit due to a physicial disability at the time of his voluntary separation. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0001416

    Original file (0001416.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the firm statement of the FPEB, the evidence of record supports the contention that the applicant was rated properly and that no injustice occurred in his separation processing upon which to recommend favorable consideration of his present request. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Complete copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00388

    Original file (BC-2003-00388.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Medical documentation appeared to reflect she was reasonably capable of performing her assigned duties right up until the time of her release from active duty. Air Force disability boards can only rate unfitting medical conditions based upon the individual’s medical status at the time of their evaluation; in essence a snapshot of the condition at that time. In their view, the applicant has not submitted any material or documentation to show an injustice occurred at the time of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 9702580

    Original file (9702580.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On or about 22 Nov 85, he failed to progress satisfactorily in the Air Force WMP by gaining 10 pounds instead of losing the 5 pounds required. On 30 Jan 89, the commander, Air Refueling Wing, , received the proposed demotion case against the applicant and agreed with the applicant’s commander that demotion action was appropriate, effective 30 Jan 89. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant reviewed this application...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-00025

    Original file (BC-2004-00025.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    USAF disability boards can only rate unfitting medical conditions based upon the individual’s medical status at the time of their evaluation; in essence a snapshot of the condition at that time. The applicant’s case file was forwarded to the Air Force CRSC Board and the applicant was granted CRSC for his service-connected disabilities. A review of the applicant’s service personnel and service medical records indicate he voluntarily retired for length of service and did not have any medical...