RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-02622
INDEX CODE: 112.10
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
XXXXXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed from 4K (medically
disqualified for continued service; or pending evaluation by MEB/PEB) to 1J
(eligible to reenlist but elected to separate).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was not forced to separate; rather he elected to separate because his
extension had run out. Separations told him that his separation code
should be 1J.
In support of his application, the applicant provides a personal statement;
his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty; his
Medical Evaluation Board (MEB)/Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) notification
of results; and his Physical Profile Serial Report. The applicant’s
complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 22 April 1993, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force at the
age of 21 in the grade of airman basic (E-1) for a period of four years.
He was progressively promoted to the rank of Staff Sergeant (E-5) effective
1 January 2000. The applicant was trained in the Health Services
Management career field. He received eight Enlisted Performance Reports
(EPRs) during his military service. His overall ratings for his EPRs
closing 1994 through 2000 were 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5 and 5 respectively. His
awards and decorations included the Air Force Achievement Medal with one
device, Air Force Longevity Service Award with one device, Air Force
Training Ribbon, Air Force Overseas Long Tour Ribbon, National Defense
Service Medal, NCO Professional Military Education Ribbon, Armed Forces
Expeditionary Medal, Air Force Outstanding Unit Award, and Air Force Good
Conduct Medal with one device.
In November 2000, two months prior to his planned separation from the
military, the applicant was hospitalized with irregular heart rhythm
characterized by a very slow heartbeat. He had a prior history of an
irregular heart beat in September 1997. The applicant was placed on
medical hold pending completion of treatment and a medical evaluation
board. The applicant’s condition was diagnosed as sick sinus syndrome and
was effectively treated with a combination of a pacemaker and medication.
The applicant underwent a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) and a Physical
Evaluation Board (PEB) in the spring of 2001. The PEB returned him to duty
with a “Code C” limitation (prevents assignments to remote locations). The
applicant continued with his separation plans. The applicant was honorably
discharged effective 14 July 2001 with a separation code KBK (completion of
required active service) and a reentry code of 4K (medically disqualified
for continued service; or pending evaluation by MEB/PEB). He had served 8
years, 2 months and 14 days on active duty.
While on active duty the applicant had intermittent gastrointestinal
distress diagnosed as gastritis (inflammation of the stomach) and
gastroparesis (poor movement of the stomach muscle) of unclear etiology.
Reevaluation by Gastroenterology in December 2000 and February 2001,
documented inflammation of the stomach with changes suspected to be due to
either drug associated gastritis or possibly Crohn’s disease. Results from
a colonoscopy were unremarkable. However, a specific antibody test was
suggestive of the diagnosis. Based on suspicion of inflammatory bowel
disease, the applicant was treated with prednisone at the time of his 26
February 2001 MEB narrative summary. The gastroenterologist’s final
diagnosis is not evident in the applicant’s service medical records;
however, the gastroenterology narrative summary indicates a diagnosis of
gastritis of unknown etiology and that the applicant was worldwide
qualified at the time of dictation. Following his discharge, the applicant
was diagnosed with Crohn’s disease.
The applicant is now receiving disability compensation from the Department
of Veterans Affairs (DVA) at 10% for sick sinus syndrome and 30% for
Crohn’s disease, for a combined compensable rating of 40%.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPAE recommends denial. The applicant is not eligible for
reenlistment once he separated, therefore the RE code of 4K is correct.
The DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit C.
The BCMR Medical Consultant is of the opinion that no change in the
applicant’s record is warranted. Action and disposition in the case were
proper and equitable reflecting compliance with Air Force directives that
implement the law.
The BCMR Medical Consultant notes that the applicant developed sick sinus
syndrome while on active duty that was treated with placement of a
pacemaker and medication within two months of his planned separation from
the Air Force. He was placed on medical hold pending completion of
treatment and medical evaluation board. The Physical Evaluation Board
returned him to duty on a Code C limitation and he continued with his
planned separation. Had the applicant instead reenlisted prior to his
diagnosis of sick sinus syndrome, he would have been retained on Code C
limitation since he was otherwise able to perform his duties. Once he had
separated and returned to non-active status, his condition is disqualifying
for reenlistment.
It is the opinion of the BCMR Consultant that the applicant likely had
Crohn’s disease for a few years prior to discharge that, due to its
indolent and limited nature could not be definitely diagnosed. It did not
interfere with his ability to perform his duty nor result in the
termination of his career. Had the applicant reenlisted rather than opting
to separate prior to diagnosis, it is likely he would have been medically
discharged when the diagnosis became clear. A condition of Crohn’s disease
is disqualifying for reenlistment.
Details of the BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation are at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 14
February 2003, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). 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. The applicant made the choice to
separate rather than reenlist. Once he separated his condition was
disqualifying for reenlistment. It is our opinion that the action in this
case was proper and equitable reflecting compliance with Air Force
directives. The applicant did not provide persuasive evidence showing the
RE code, which was issued at the time of his separation, did not accurately
reflects the circumstances of his separation. In view of the foregoing, we
conclude that no basis exists upon which to recommend favorable action on
his request that it be changed.
_________________________________________________________________
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 this application in Executive
Session on 2 April 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Edward C. Koenig III, Panel Chair
Ms. Brenda L. Romine, Member
Mr. Thomas J. Topolski, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR
Docket No. BC-2002-02622:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 Aug 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 3 Feb 03.
Exhibit D. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 29 Oct 02.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Feb 03.
EDWARD C. KOENIG III
Panel Chair
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01578
The Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) adjudicated the FM, urinary incontinence and chronic abdominal pain conditions as unfitting, bundled into one rating of 10%with application of the Veteran’s Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).The remaining conditionwas determined to be not disqualifying.The CI made no appeals, and was medically separated with a 10% disability rating. The diagnoses of FM, urinary incontinence and chronic abdominal pain with diarrhea were forwarded to the PEB....
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 00696
The CI was then medically separated. The Board directs attention to its rating recommendationbased on the above evidence.The PEB’s 10% rating was based on a combined 7319 code (IBS) and analogous 7323 code (ulcerative colitis).The VA assigned a 60% ratingunder an analogous 7323 code for Crohn’s disease deemed to be “severe; with numerous attacks a year and malnutrition, the health only fair during remissions.” However, the VA additionally assigned 10% for separately rated irritable bowel...
AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD 2014 00038
The Informal PEB adjudicated bradycardia and sick sinus syndrome, transient light headedness, chest pain, mild distal esophageal stricture currently asymptomatic, dyspnea on exertion, and gastroesophageal reflux (GERD) currently controlledas unfitting, rated at 0%.The remaining conditions, migraines, chronic lower back pain and obesity conditions were determined to be Category III and not unfitting.The CI made no appeals and was medically separated. The NARSUM examiner noted that the CI was...
AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-00980
The PEB adjudicated “abdominal pain, due to irritable bowel syndrome, with gastritis” and “chronic subjective neck pain status post fusion, without neurologic abnormality, cervical range of motion limited by pain”as unfitting, rated 10% and 10%, respectively, with application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).The remaining conditions were determined to be not unfitting.The CI made no appeals and was medically separated. The report of medical examination (DD...
AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD 2014 01136
Following partial bowel resection, the CI denied symptom of abdominal pain or abnormal bowel movements and service exams documented normal abdominal exams. XXXXXXXXXXXXXX PresidentDoD Physical Disability Board of Review I have carefully reviewed the evidence of record and the recommendation of the Board.
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011 00703
The difference in dates is relevant to this case, as the actualVA rating decision was made only 7 months after separation from USMC and said VA rating was made after the appropriate VA medical was undertaken soon after SNM was separated from USMC, as is directed by VA regulations. Repeat laboratory testing in March 2002 was again normal (negative for evidence of acute or chronic inflammation) and the gastroenterologist was not certain whether symptoms were due to Crohn’s disease or...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00187
However, applicant’s medical condition was considered restricting and required an Assignment Limitation Code C. Applicant was not mobility qualified. The evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPAMM indicates that the applicant has had chronic leg pain since basic training. It is fair to note that at the time of her separation, there were no limitations on her assignability by the Medical Standards Branch.
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01787
The Board’s role is thus confined to the review of medical records and all evidence at hand to assess the fairness of PEB rating determinations, compared to VASRD standards, based on ratable severity at the time of separation; and, to review those fitness determinations within its scope (as elaborated above) consistent with performance-based criteria in evidence at separation. BOARD FINDINGS : IAW DoDI 6040.44, provisions of DoD or Military Department regulations or guidelines relied upon...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2001-01184A
______________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends consideration for rating her neurocardiogenic syncope based on the severity of the condition at the time of her discharge. The service medical record finds no evidence of these symptoms while on active duty. In this regard, we note that the BCMR Medical Consultant believes that had her diagnosis of neorocardiogenic syncope been made definitively while on...
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01484
The physical examination was normal.The VA rating decision of 12June 1998 assigned a 10% disability rating for the CI’s Crohn’s disease. The gastroenterologist concluded that the CI’s Crohn’s disease was stable and advised to continue his usual medication regimen.The CI was removed from the TDRL and separated with 10% disability for Crohn’s disease (VASRD code 7399-7323).The Board directs attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence.The Board first considered if a...