RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-02230
            INDEX CODE:  112.10

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His discharge with severance pay based on unfitness be overturned  and
he be allowed to return to the Air Force.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) made an  error  in  judgment  when
they made the decision to prematurely end his Air  Force  career.   He
could have continued to serve his country on active duty had  he  been
given the opportunity to cross train to another career field.  At  his
separation there were Air  Force  Specialty’s  critically  undermanned
that he would have voluntarily retrained into.

Post surgery, he worked hard to prove  he  was  willing  and  able  to
continue his Air Force career and feels the decision made to medically
separate him was based on statistics and not facts.  He states  if  he
has to follow rules and regulations set  forth  in  those  proceedings
then the PEB members should also.  He feels it a contradiction the Air
Force finds him 10 percent disabled and yet also find  him  unfit  for
continued  service.   He  was  not  given  a  physical  to  gauge  his
limitations (if any) and it is unfair the Air Force made it’s decision
after not weighing all the facts.  He loved his job and wants it back.
 He wants a review of his record to determine whether or not  all  the
evidence indicates he is unfit for further active duty.

In support of his  appeal,  the  applicant  has  provided  a  personal
statement,  copies  of  certificate  awarding  his  third  Air   Force
Achievement Medal (AFAM), e-mails, and  several  letters  of  support,
certificates of training, accomplishment, and recognition, and a  copy
of the PEB findings.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant entered the Regular  Air  Force  on  22  March  1995  as  an
aircraft fuel systems journeyman.   On  18  July  2001,  he  underwent
spinal surgery to relieve chronic lower back pain and associated  left
leg pain, weakness, and numbness.   A  subsequent  Medical  Evaluation
Board (MEB) notes he did well with rehabilitation as long  as  he  did
not engage in heavy lifting or high impact activity.  In a 2 June 2002
memorandum,  his  neurosurgeon  recommended  he  not  return  to   any
specialty that would  require  lifting,  jumping,  or  other  vigorous
physical exertion.  On  9 August  2002,  a  PEB  issued  its  findings
regarding the fitness of the applicant  to  continue  serving.   Their
determination  was  that  he  was  unfit  for  continued  service  and
recommended discharge with severance pay at a  compensable  rating  of
10%.  On 15 November 2002, he was honorably  discharged  after  having
served seven years, seven months, and twenty-four days of total active
federal service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant reviewed this application and  recommended
denial.  He states the applicant’s physical limitations made him unfit
to perform the duties of his Air Force Specialty.  One year after  his
surgery, the applicant’s neurosurgeon recommended  permanent  physical
limitations that prevented him from returning to his  specialty.   The
applicant  also  reported  recurrent  pain  with  increased  activity.
Although he demonstrated an excellent capacity to perform  in  a  more
sedentary occupational setting, the PEB properly  concluded  that  his
condition was not compatible with the  rigors  of  continued  military
service.  Even  Air  Force  specialties  that  do  not  involve  heavy
physical activity in the performance of routine daily  duties  require
their members to meet Air Force physical fitness and weight  standards
and are required to deploy.  Deployment does  involve  heavy  physical
activity and  duties  outside  the  core  tasks  of  one’s  particular
specialty that includes lifting and carrying of  heavy  equipment  and
supplies, set up and breakdown of temporary  facilities,  carrying  of
weapons and force protection duties, etc.  Thus the applicant was  not
a suitable candidate for retraining into another specialty despite his
high level of motivation and ability.

Air Force medical standards for entry onto  active  duty  list  spinal
fusion as  disqualifying.   Spinal  fusion  such  as  the  applicant’s
require limitation on  physical  activity  since  the  spinal  segment
adjacent to the fused  segment  is  subjected  to  increased  stresses
leading to pain and accelerated  degenerative  changes  when  physical
activity is not restricted.   The  applicant’s  hypertension  is  also
disqualifying for reentry.  Action and disposition in  this  case  are
proper and equitable reflecting compliance with Air  Force  directives
that implement the law.

The Medical Consultant’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________



APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the  applicant  on
19 December 2003 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 timely filed.

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  and
sympathize with his situation; 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.  We  noted
his outstanding contribution to  the  Air  Force  and  especially  his
effort, post-surgery, to prove himself capable of continuing  his  Air
Force career.  However, the  Air  Force  considers  spinal  fusion  as
disqualifying for military service.   Therefore,  in  the  absence  of
evidence to the contrary, we find no  compelling  basis  to  recommend
granting the relief sought in this application.

4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not  been
shown  that  a  personal  appearance  with  or  without  counsel  will
materially  add  to  our  understanding  of  the  issue(s)   involved.
Therefore, the request for a hearing 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2003-02230 in Executive Session on 2 March 2004, under the  provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Roscoe Hinton, Jr., Panel Chair
      Ms. Martha Maust, Member
      Ms. Carolyn B. Willis, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 28 Jun 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 2 Dec 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Dec 03.



                                   ROSCOE HINTON, JR.
                                   Panel Chair