RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-04019
INDEX CODE: 108.00
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: HELEN L. CORNELL
XXXXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His honorable discharge from the Tennessee Air National Guard (ANG) be set
aside, and he be awarded compensation for his undetermined service-
connected condition retroactive to his date of discharge, 11 February 1983.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Although he left the military for medical reasons, which were service
connected, he has never received the medical military compensation to which
he is entitled.
In support of his request, the applicant submits copies of his NGB Form 22,
Report of Separation and Record of Service, and AF Form 422, Physical
Profile Serial Report. The applicant’s complete submission, with
attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 1 April 1968, the applicant was drafted and entered the Regular Army at
the age of 19. He was released from active duty on 31 March 1970 and
entered the Army Reserve on 1 April 1970. The applicant completed his
reserve obligation with the Army on 11 January 1972. On 12 January 1972,
the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force in the grade of sergeant
for a period of four years. He was honorably released from active duty on
20 November 1972 under the provisions of AFM 39-10 for the convenience of
the government. At that time, he was credited with a total of 2 years, 10
months and 9 days of active duty service. On 21 November 1972, he enlisted
in the Air National Guard and Reserve of the Air Force for six years in the
grade of sergeant (E-4). He was progressively promoted to the grade of
technical sergeant effective and with a date of rank of 1 October 1980.
The applicant became an Air Reserve Technician, which required that he
maintain his active Reserve participation while working in a government
civil service position. On 11 February 1983, the applicant was
administratively separated due to medical disqualification for non-service
connected depression. He was credited with 12 years, 8 months and 9 days
of satisfactory Federal service.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends the application be denied. The BCMR
Medical Consultant states that a review of the applicant’s medical records
show that the applicant had no significant health issues until 1979.
During a periodic physical exam on 15 August 1977, the applicant reported a
“nervous condition.” He was currently undergoing a divorce. During his
next periodic physical examination on 5 August 1978, the applicant reported
no problems. The applicant was hospitalized for “reactive depression” 8-16
August 1979 and 8-22 September 1979. Following the 1979 hospitalizations,
the applicant participated in Alcoholics Anonymous. The BCMR Consultant
states that according to the applicant’s Air National Guard Point Credit
Summary, the applicant was not on active duty status at the time of his two
1979 hospitalizations. The applicant was again hospitalized on 1 November
1982, for anxiety after isolating himself in his apartment for two weeks,
not going to work and drinking heavily (history reported by the applicant’s
Mother obtained from the 4 November 1982 Parthenon Social History Update
report). The BCMR Consultant states that according to the applicant’s Air
National Guard Point Summary, the applicant was not on active duty during
his 1982 hospitalization. On 24 November 1982, the applicant underwent a
Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) that concluded his depression was not
incurred while entitled to basic pay and recommended medical
disqualification and administrative discharge (not disability discharge).
The State Air Surgeon and National Guard Bureau Air Surgeon concurred with
the MEB’s conclusions and recommendation. There is no information
regarding disability benefits the applicant received through civil service.
The BCMR Medical Consultant states that the applicant filed a claim with
the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) for service connection for
depression in November 1982; however, his request was denied in January
1983. In subsequent years the applicant has been repeatedly denied service
connected disability compensation by the DVA for Post Traumatic Stress
Disorder related to his Army service in Vietnam.
The BCMR Medical Consultant summarizes the applicant developed recurrent
depression with associated alcohol abuse beginning in 1979 requiring
hospitalization. The applicant recovered from his first bout that was
related to marital and job stress. His hospitalization in November 1982
for recurrent depression, again related to marital and job stress, lead to
his medical disqualification for continued service in the ANG. It is the
BCMR Medical Consultant’s opinion that since his recurrent depression, a
chronic illness, was not proximately caused by active duty and did not
occur while on active duty receiving basic pay, he is not eligible for
disability compensation by the Air Force. The BCMR Medical Consultant’s
evaluation is at Exhibit C.
AFPC/DPPD recommends the application be denied. The applicant has not
provided any evidence to show an injustice occurred at the time of his
involuntary discharge from the ANG that would justify his entitlement to
compensation for a service-connected medical condition. DPPD states that
AFR 35-4, Chapter 8, dated 12 September 1980, in effect at the time of the
applicant’s ANG service, states that non-regular members whose disability
was not incurred or diagnosed while performing active duty, full time
training duty, or active duty for training under a call that specified a
period of more than 30 days, were ineligible for processing by a Physical
Evaluation Board (PEB) under this regulation. Service members who were
evaluated and found unfit by the medical facility commander were
appropriately processed as a non-medical discharge under the appropriate
USAFR or ANG directive. It is DPPD’s opinion that since the applicant’s
unfitting medical condition was not incurred or diagnosed while on military
orders, he did not qualify for processing under military disability laws
and policy established in AFR 35-4. DPPD concurs with the overall comments
and recommendation in the BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation. The
AFPC/DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 30 May 2003, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the
applicant for review and comment. As of this date, this office has
received no response (Exhibit E).
_________________________________________________________________
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. The evidence provided does not persuade
us that an injustice occurred at the time the applicant was involuntarily
discharge from the Air National Guard that would justify his entitlement to
compensation for a service-connected medical condition. It is our opinion
that since no evidence has been provided showing that the applicant’s
unfitting medical condition was incurred or diagnosed while on military
orders, he does not qualify for processing under military disability laws
or regulations. There is no indication in his records that the actions or
findings surrounding his involuntary discharge were contrary to regulation
or accepted medical principles or that he was treated differently from
other members in similar circumstances. We therefore agree with the
assessments by the Air Force advisories and adopt their rationale as the
basis for our decision. Accordingly, the applicant’s request is not
favorably considered.
_________________________________________________________________
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 23 July 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Robert S. Boyd, Panel Chair
Mr. Laurence M. Groner, Member
Mr. Mike Novel, Member
The following documentary evidence for AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2003-04019
was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 10 Dec 02, with attachments.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 28 Apr 03.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 27 May 03.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 May 03.
ROBERT S. BOYD
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-01368
On 24 November 2004, he was notified he would not be reenlisted in the ANG and that his AGR tour would end concurrent with his date of separation of 6 April 2005. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPD recommended denial. Exhibit C. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 2 May 07 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 May 07.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03911
A review of his medical records failed to show that his back injury was sustained on 12 Nov 65 as a result of a missile motor slipping its cradle during assembly in support of combat training missions. The Medical Consultant states a single medical record entry indicates he presented for lumbosacral back pain on 12 Nov 65 but no mechanism of injury is documented and there are no work-site accident or injury reports present in the records that may provide additional information. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01560
The BCMR Medical Consultant is of the opinion that the preponderance of the evidence does not support a finding of EPTS and recommends a change of records to show a disability discharge for Bulimia Nervosa at 10 percent. The decision to process a member through the military DES is determined by a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) when he or she is determined disqualified for continued military service. Based on the assessment by the BCMR Medical Consultant, it appears probable that the...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01026
Whereas the Air Force rates a member's disability based on the degree of severity at the time of separation. The BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPD recommends the application be denied. Whereas the Air Force rates a member's disability based on the degree of severity at the time of separation.
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...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01238
On 5 Feb 01, the Air Force PEB recommended that the applicant be discharged from the Air Force with severance pay with a combined disability rating of 10 percent. 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 on 19 Sep 03 for review and comment within 30 days. It is our opinion that because of the severity of his condition...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03095
On 6 March 2000, the applicant submitted her rebuttal letter to SAFPC requesting a disability retirement, with a compensable disability rating of 40 percent. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: The BCMR Medical Consultant summarized the information contained in the applicant’s personnel and medical records and is of the opinion that the preponderance of the evidence of the record supports a disability rating of 20 percent. A complete...
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...
Her complete submission is at Exhibit A. Her records indicate she is currently being compensated by the DVA (see Exhibit D). 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.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01707
His medical records include two physical examinations, one completed on 31 October 1946 at the time of his discharge from the U.S. Army, and another completed 22 August 1952 during his active duty period in the U.S. Air Force. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant reviewed this case for a second time and determined that action and disposition in this case are proper and equitable reflecting compliance...