RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02707
INDEX CODE: 112.10
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
XXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: YES
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 4 March 2006
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His records be changed to delete a diagnosis of spina bifida occulta and
indicate his back pain was aggravated by service in order to obtain
Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) benefits.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The Air Force diagnosed him with a condition he never had, which led to his
discharge from the military. He never had spina bifida occulta or
spondylolysis of L-5 prior to basic training. His back was aggravated
during basic training.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a personal statement, a
copy of his Medical Board Report, military and civilian medical records,
and an Adjudication Officer response to the applicant’s request for
disability benefits. The applicant’s complete submission, with
attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant’s case is limited to documents submitted by the applicant.
No service personnel record or service medical record is available for
review. According to the applicant’s DD Form 214, he enlisted in the
Regular Air Force on 5 April 1971, at the age of 19 in the grade of airman
basic (E-1) for a period of four years.
A clinical record and Medical Board Report, dated 29 April 1971, indicates
the applicant was evaluated by Orthopedics following a complaint of back
pain. The clinical record indicates the applicant had a longstanding
history of back problems following an auto accident occurring four years
earlier. The attending physician and medical board diagnosed the applicant
with spina bifida occulta (non-fusion of the spinous process) with
spondoylolysis of L5, which existed prior to service and not permanently
aggravated by service. The Medical Board indicated the applicant’s
physical defect precluded full utilization in the military service, and
recommended application for discharge be approved.
The applicant was honorably discharged effective 6 May 1971 under the
provisions of AFM 39-10, paragraph 3-8G (Convenience of the Government; to
Correct Erroneous Enlistment or Induction). He had served one month and
two days on active duty.
In response to a SAF/MRBR letter, dated 5 November 2004, the applicant
provided a copy of his DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States
Report of Transfer or Discharge.
_________________________________________________________________
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 x-
rays performed on the applicant’s back in-service are reported to have
shown both spina bifida occulta and spondylolysis of the L5 vertebra. The
applicant’s unfitting back condition was determined to have existed prior
to service and to not have been permanently aggravated by service beyond
the natural progression of the condition; therefore, not qualifying for
disability compensation. The Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) also
denied the applicant service connection for back pain in 1971.
It is the BCMR Medical Consultant’s opinion that the preponderance of the
submitted evidence does not support an error in the submitted military
records. 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 8
April 2005, for review and comment within 30 days. 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. However, the
applicant has provided no evidence which, in our opinion, successfully
refutes the assessment of his case by the BCMR Medical Consultant.
Therefore, we agree with the recommendation of the BCMR Medical Consultant
and adopt his opinion as our findings in this case. In view of the above,
we find no basis to favorably consider the applicant’s request.
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 issues 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 probable 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 June 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Michael J. Novel, Panel Chair
Ms. Patricia R. Collins, Member
Mr. Vance Lineberger, Member
The following documentary evidence for AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2004-02707
was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 23 Aug 04, with atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Reconstructed Personnel Record.
Exhibit C. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 5 Apr 05.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Apr 05.
MICHAEL J. NOVEL
Panel Chair
AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-01339
The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to review of medical records and all available evidence for application of the VASRD standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. Post-Separation)ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Low Back Pain ... (Subuming Spondylolysis/Spondylosisthesis)523920%Lumbar Spine Spondylolysis ... (Subsuming Bilateral Radiculopathy)523920%20091228Other x 0 (Not In Scope)Other x 0 RATING: 20%RATING: 20%...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2003-02873
They denied service connection for his low back condition, to include chronic low back pain, the congenital condition of spina bifida occulta, and his degenerative arthritis of the lumbar spine, because the evidence did not show his low back condition was permanently worsened beyond the natural progress of the disease as a result of service. Although the applicant’s back pain rendered him unfit after several months on active duty, evidence of the available records indicates his condition...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002078082C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. Medical proceedings, regardless of the date completed, must establish that a medical condition was identified by appropriate military medical authority within 6 months of the soldier’s initial entrance of active duty that would have permanently or temporarily disqualified him or her for entry into the military service or entry on active duty had it been detected at that...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004101468C070208
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 5 October 2004 DOCKET NUMBER: AR2004101468 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. He was not disabled prior to enlisting in the military. As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01531
On 5 December 1978, the MEB recommended he be forwarded to a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB). ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that there is no evidence to support a higher disability rating at the time of the applicant’s separation. In deference to the comments of the BCMR Medical Consultant, which appear to be supported by the evidence of record, and...
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02758
SEPARATION DATE: 20071123 Since then, he had noted re-aggravation of his LBP. The Board noted that the ROM for both the MEB and VA examinations supports a 20% rating, but the criteria for a 40% rating are not met.
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 00080
Separation Date: 20011225 SUMMARY OF CASE :Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty Specialist/E4 (52C10/Utilities Equipment Repairer) medically separated for “ chronic lower back pain(LBP) secondary to L5-S1 herniated nucleus pulposus(HNP)without neurologic abnormality or documented chronic paravertebral muscle spasms.” Despite neurology and neurosurgery evaluations, extensive physical therapy, and medications, the...
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01126
RATING COMPARISON : Service IPEB – Dated 20011102VA* - Service Treatment Records (STR)ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Chronic Low Back Pain with Mild Compression Fracture of T12-L1 and Degenerative Lower Lumbar Disc Disease529510%DDD L5-S1 with Spondylolysis529310%STRChronic Retropatellar Pain SyndromeNot UnfittingRetropatellar Pain Syndrome; s/p Arthroscopy w/Residuals, Old Tear and Lateral Meniscus with Laxity or Lateral Collateral Ligament, Right...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100007338
The applicant requests his military records be changed to show he was discharged for a reason other than "failure to meet procurement medical fitness standards." On 28 October 2004, an EPSBD found the applicant medically unfit for enlistment in accordance with current medical fitness standards and in the opinion of the evaluating physicians the condition existed prior to service. The EPSBD further found the applicant did meet retention standards under the provisions of Army Regulation...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090014208
Item 77 shows the examining physician indicated the applicant qualified for "void induction UP paragraph 5-9.1, Army Regulation 635-200." In response to a Congressional inquiry on behalf of the applicant by his mother, a physical examination of the applicant was completed: a. records show the applicant had a medical evaluation on 27 September 1968 and on 9 October 1968 (on both occasions) his medical condition that existed prior to service was identified by the examining physician as...