RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-00804
                                       INDEX CODE:  108.00
      XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX                COUNSEL: NONE

      XXXXXXXXX                         HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her military records be corrected  to  show  she  was  medically  discharged
because of service connected injuries.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her  back  condition  warranted  referral  into  the  Air  Force  Disability
Evaluation System for disability  compensation.   Her  requests  to  have  a
medical board review were ignored until  her  discharge  for  completion  of
service on 9 April 1999.  She filed a claim with the Department of  Veterans
Affairs (DVA) in 2002; however, her request for compensation was denied.

In support of her application, the applicant provides e-mail  from  the  Air
Force Physical Disability Division informing her of her right to  appeal  to
the Air Force Board for Corrections of Military  Records.   The  applicant’s
complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

According to the available military records, the applicant was  appointed  a
first lieutenant (O-2) Reserve of the Air Force on  10 April  1995,  at  the
age of 42, as an OB/GYN Nurse Practitioner.  She was promoted to  the  grade
of captain (O-3) effective 4 April 1996.

After developing chronic  low  back  pain,  the  applicant  underwent  spine
surgery    including    decompressing    laminectomy    and    fusion    for
spondylolisthesis at L5-S1, on 19 January 1999 (three months  prior  to  her
separation).  Following her surgery, the applicant  was  placed  on  medical
hold  until  full  recovery  and  the  doctor  release  from  medical  hold.
According to a letter from  her  Neurosurgeon,  dated  12  March  1999,  the
applicant’s  recovery  was  progressing  as  expected  with  an   estimation
recovery period of four to six months.  His recommendation was to  give  the
applicant the option to extend her  service  time  until  her  recovery  was
reasonably complete.

There is no indication in the records when the applicant was  released  from
medical hold; however, on 9 April 1999,  the  applicant  was  released  from
active duty for completion of required service.  She served  four  years  on
active duty.  On 1 October 2003,  the  applicant  was  honorably  discharged
from all appointments in the Air Force.

According to the DVA, the applicant’s claim has not been finalized as  of  1
December 2004; therefore she is not receiving a DVA compensation award  yet.


_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant  is  of  the  opinion  that  no  change  in  the
applicant’s records is warranted.  The BCMR Medical Consultant  states  that
the evidence of record indicates  the  applicant  recovered  from  her  back
surgery and returned to work.  A referral for MEB was  not  indicated.   Had
she not separated in April 1999, she would have returned to full duty.

It  is  the  opinion  of  the  BCMR  Medical  Consultant  that  action   and
disposition in this case were proper  and  equitable  reflecting  compliance
with Air  Force  directives  that  implement  the  law.   The  BCMR  Medical
Consultant’s 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  31
August 2004, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D).  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 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 an error or injustice.   We  took  notice  of  the  applicant's
complete submission in judging the merits of the case and do not  find  that
it supports a determination that  the  applicant  was  improperly  separated
from active duty in 1999.  We note that on  12  March  1999,  the  attending
physician  indicated  that  the  applicant’s  recovery  was  progressing  as
expected with an estimation recovery period of  four  to  six  months.   His
recommendation was to give the applicant the option to  extend  her  service
time until  her  recovery  was  reasonably  complete.   The  next  available
evidence  indicates  the  applicant  was  released  from  active  duty   for
completion of required service, not because of her  medical  condition.   In
order for a member to be retired by reason of physical disability,  by  law,
it must be established that the member is unfit to  perform  the  duties  of
his or her office and grade in such a manner as to  reasonably  fulfill  the
purpose of their employment on active duty.  Neither does the record  reveal
nor has the applicant provided any evidence that would lead  us  to  believe
that  she  was  physically  unfit  within  the  meaning  of  the   governing
regulation, which implements the law.  In fact, we  note  she  was  able  to
return to employment as a nurse upon her discharge.  In view  of  the  above
and absent persuasive evidence that  the  applicant  was  denied  rights  to
which entitled, appropriate regulations were not  followed,  or  appropriate
standards were not applied, we agree with the opinion and recommendation  of
the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt  its  rationale  as
our finding in this case.   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 14 December 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

            Mr. Robert S. Boyd, Panel Chair
            Ms. Renee M. Collier, Member
            Ms. Janet I. Hassan, Member

The following documentary evidence for AFBCMR  Docket  Number  BC-2004-00804
was considered:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 Feb 04.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 16 Aug 04.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 31 Aug 04.




                             ROBERT S. BOYD
                                             Panel Chair