Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02007
Original file (BC-2003-02007.doc) Auto-classification: Denied





                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-02007
            INDEX CODE:  110.02

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her type of discharge be changed from an administrative discharge  due
to physical disqualification to a permanent medical discharge.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her  doctor  stated  that  her  disability   was   undetermined   with
restrictions.  She was never taken off Profile 4 or given  the  chance
to perform in a light duty capacity.  Her doctor has since  determined
her physical restrictions are permanent as  of  15 February  2000  and
therefore affects her livelihood and employment potential.

In support of her appeal, applicant has provided copies  of  a  letter
from  her  neurologist,  a  decision  from  the  Waco,   TX   Veterans
Administration (VA) regional office, a Functional Capacity evaluation,
an Impairment evaluation, results of a Magnetic Resonance Image  (MRI)
test, a letter from the US Department of Labor to applicant’s  Reserve
unit, a personal letter to her Reserve unit, and two letters from  her
neurologist.

Applicant'scomplete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 19 April 1996, the  applicant  was  injured  on  the  job  while  a
civilian air reserve technician (ART) serving as an aircraft  mechanic
with the --th Fighter Squadron.  On 19 April  1996,  she  injured  her
back lifting an aircraft tow bar.  On 29 October 1996, she underwent a
lumbar laminectomy and discectomy  for  a  herniated  disc.   She  was
subsequently the subject of a Physical Profile Serial Report (dated 26
Feb 97) wherein she was deemed not qualified for  deployment  and  not
qualified for reassignment.  She was placed  on  a  “4”  Profile  that
prohibited her from participating in the Reserve program  for  pay  or
points.   She  was  notified  that  AFRES/SGP  would  make  the  final
determination on her medical  qualifications  for  continued  military
duty.  On 17 October 1997, she was given  the  opportunity  to  choose
between a referral to the Informal Physical  Evaluation  Board  (IPEB)
solely for fitness determination or to not be referred  to  the  IPEB.
She chose to not be referred to the IPEB  and  concurrently  indicated
her  understanding  that,  in  the  event  she  was  found   medically
disqualified for worldwide duty, she would either apply for retirement
or be administratively separated.  She was transferred to the  Retired
Reserve on 8 April  1998.   On  6  July  1998,  she  was  informed  by
ARPC/DPKB she had completed the required years of service  to  qualify
for a Reserve retirement at age 60.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFRC/DPZ  recommends   denial.    The   applicant   was   subject   to
administrative discharge  due  to  her  physical  disqualification,  a
discharge that is essentially  a  permanent  medical  discharge.   She
elected to retire  in  lieu  of  the  administrative  discharge.   The
applicant has not provided any documentation to support the  discharge
action she elected was not valid.

DPZ’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant refers to AFRC/DPM memorandum dated 13 Jan 1998  (Attachment
1 of rebuttal), paragraph 4 that states if the applicant did not elect
“early retirement” she would not be eligible to receive any retirement
or medical benefits until age 60.  She contends no  person  or  office
counseled her regarding her “rights and options  following  a  medical
disqualification,”  or   concerning   the   differences   between   an
“administrative  discharge”  or  “early  retirement”  as  proposed  by
Attachment 2 of her rebuttal, a memorandum from  AFRC/SGPA,  dated  10
November 1997.  She was  never  given  the  opportunity  to  choose  a
“medical discharge with military compensation.”   She  therefore  asks
the Board to consider changing  her  permanent  military  record  from
“Retired Reserve” to “Medical Discharge with Compensation.”

_________________________________________________________________

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 opinion and recommendation of the Air Force
office 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.  The applicant ultimately elected to be retired
with a  Reserve  retirement  at  age  60  in  lieu  of  administrative
discharge based  on  physical  disqualification.   Therefore,  in  the
absence of 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 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2003-02007  in  Executive  Session  on  28  October  2003,  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
      Ms. Sharon B. Seymour, Member
      Ms. Leslie E. Abbott, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 6 Jun 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFRC/DPZ, dated 11 Sep 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 Sep 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 9 Oct 03, w/atchs.




                                   RICHARD A. PETERSON
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03128

    Original file (BC-2005-03128.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of his application, the applicant provides a personal statement; and copies of training orders, personnel brief, medical records, and numerous memorandums/letters/e-mails concerning his FFD evaluation, PEB findings, and his administrative discharge. DPZ states the administrative LOD paperwork, filed in the applicant’s military medical records, documents his head injuries on 8 April 2004 and indicates he inflicted the injuries upon himself. The DPPD evaluation, with attachments,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00653

    Original file (BC-2003-00653.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00653 INDEX CODE: 108.02 COUNSEL: Mr. Roy R. Levin HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her discharge for misconduct be changed to reflect that she was medically retired. However, discharge action under that provision is not appropriate if a member's record supports discharge for another reason, such as...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9702848

    Original file (9702848.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Available records reflect that the applicant was retired from the Air Force Reserve on 16 December 1996 by reason of medical disqualification, in the grade of Technical Sergeant (E-6). However, we do not find evidence that the applicant’s commander approved a recommendation for promotion. Exhibit H. Medical Records.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1997-02848

    Original file (BC-1997-02848.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Available records reflect that the applicant was retired from the Air Force Reserve on 16 December 1996 by reason of medical disqualification, in the grade of Technical Sergeant (E-6). However, we do not find evidence that the applicant’s commander approved a recommendation for promotion. Exhibit H. Medical Records.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-00342

    Original file (BC-2005-00342.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Between 1998 and 2001 prior to his activation, his civilian physicians had treated his Anxiety Disorder with various medications. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFRC/DPM recommends granting Item A by awarding the applicant 10 active duty pay and points for the 1-10 Feb 04 TDY to Lackland AFB, TX, because he should have been on active duty orders at that time. Based on the available documentation, the Consultant concludes the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2003-00940

    Original file (BC-2003-00940.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Examiner’s Note: Applicant’s case file was originally submitted on 10 Mar 03, and at her counsel’s request was temporarily withdrawn on 30 Jun 03. The HQ AFRC/DPZ complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: By DD Form 149, dated 5 Oct 05, and by letter, through counsel, dated 3 Nov 05, she reiterated her original contentions that the discharge board was improperly instructed regarding...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03169

    Original file (BC-2003-03169.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Disability processing records reveal a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) was initiated on 17 Jun 03, and the results was referred to the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) which ultimately recommended she be discharged with entitlement to disability severance pay with a 10 percent disability rating. Because her disability rating was rated less than 30 percent disabling, she was not eligible for a disability retirement under the provision of Title 10, USC, Section 1201. Based on a...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0000980

    Original file (0000980.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant, a member of the Air Force Reserve, was processed through the Disability Evaluation System (DES) when her disability case was referred to the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) in December 1999, for a diagnosis of dysthymic disorder. Counsel provided a statement supporting the applicant’s requests to change the IG findings; credit satisfactory service to 20 plus years; change the AF...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2001-03601A

    Original file (BC-2001-03601A.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Further, as noted by SAF/MRBP and the IPEB, the variety of treatment recommendations and opinions from different sources appear to indicate that the best course of action at this time would be to place the applicant on the TDRL with a rating of 30% with reevaluation by an orthopedic surgeon and a neurologist in 12 months. He was not released from active duty on 15 May 2000 for completion of required active service and transferred to the Reserves, but on that date his name was placed on the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2001-03145A

    Original file (BC-2001-03145A.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board agreed with the OPRs' recommendation and directed that the applicant undergo a physical examination and review by the Medical Evaluation Board (MEB), the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) and the Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB), if necessary, to determine her medical condition as of the date of her discharge. A complete copy of the Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C. SAF/MRBP indicated that they considered all of the evidence and testimony presented before the...