RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00704
INDEX CODE: 110.00
XXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
XXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be set aside and her
discharge be changed to a disability discharge.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
She was found medically unfit but was discharged with a general discharge
before final disposition of her medical case was finalized.
In support of her appeal, applicant submits a copy of AFPC/DPPD, Disability
Operations Branch, letter dated 10 Jan 06 and a copy of her DD Form 214.
Applicant’s submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 28 June 2000, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force for a
period of 6 years. She was progressively promoted to the grade of senior
airman (E-4).
Records reflect that based on the applicant’s condition of Chronic
Constipation and Abdominal Pain, a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) convened
to consider her case. On 6 December 2004, the MEB rendered diagnoses of
Chronic Constipation and Abdominal Pain. The MEB referred the case for
consideration by an Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB). On 21
December 2004, an IPEB was convened to consider her case. The board found
that the applicant was physically unfit for further military duty and that
her condition was ratable at 10%. The board recommended that the applicant
be discharged with severance pay.
On 2 August 2005, the applicant was tried by a general court-martial for
violation of Article 112a, wrongful use of methamphetamine. She pled
guilty, was found guilty and was sentenced to be reduced to the grade of E-
1, airman basic and 90 days hard labor without confinement. The sentence
was subsequently approved but the execution of that part of the sentence
extending to hard labor without confinement was suspended for two months,
at which time, unless the suspension is sooner vacated, the suspended part
of the sentence would be remitted without further action.
On 14 October 2005, the applicant was discharged with a general (under
honorable conditions) discharge because of misconduct. She was credited
with 5 years, 3 months and 20 days, of total active duty service.
On 10 January 2006, AFPC/DPPD advised the applicant that she was
erroneously discharged prior to the final disposition of her medical
disability case. She was given the option to apply for a correction of her
military record to allow her dual action case be reviewed by the SAFPC for
their recommendation for the type of discharge action.
On 6 April 2006, the Secretary of the Air Force recommended that the
previously executed AFI 36-3208 (Administrative Separation of Airmen)
action be sustained, and, thus, terminating the action under the provisions
of AF-36-3212 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, and
Separation) based upon the establishment that the member’s physical and
mental impairments should not have inhibited her ability to distinguish the
difference between right and wrong.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPD recommends the application be denied. DPPD states the applicant
was inadvertently discharged while still undergoing disability processing.
After completion of the court martial, the administrative discharge was
initiated and finalized without being seen by the Secretary of the Air
Force Personnel Council. Both the administrative and the disability cases
should have been forwarded to the SAFPC as a dual action process and grade
determination if required. On 6 April 2006, DPPD advises that SAFPC
reviewed both the medical board findings and the administrative discharge
package and recommended the administrative discharge be upheld. The
AFPC/DPPD evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Applicant submits various medical documents from the Presbyterian
Healthcare Services and from the 377th Medical Group, Kirtland AFB, NM.
Applicant’s submission is at Exhibit E.
_________________________________________________________________
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. After a thorough review of the evidence
of record and the applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that her
discharge prior to the final disposition of her medical case was of such
severity to warrant her general discharge being set aside. The applicant
points to the Disability Operations Branch (AFPC/DPPD) letter advising her
that she was erroneously discharged prior to the final disposition of her
medical disability case. We note that, on 6 April 2006, the Secretary of
the Air Force Personnel Council (SAF/PC) recommended that the previously
executed administrative separation action be sustained. Having no basis to
question the integrity of the SAF/PC who asserts they conducted a
retrospective “dual-action” review of the applicant’s case and recommends
the previously executed action remain in effect, the Board concludes that
the error in discharging the applicant prior to the final disposition of
her case constitutes a harmless error. Therefore, in the absence of
substantial evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to grant the relief
sought in this application.
_________________________________________________________________
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 23 May 2006, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Cathlynn B. Sparks, Panel Chair
Ms. Josephine L. Davis, Member
Mr. Jay H. Jordan, Member
The following documentary evidence for AFBCMR Docket Number 06-00704 was
considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dtd 1 Mar 06, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dtd 18 Apr 06, w/atch.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dtd 28 Apr 06.
Exhibit E. Correspondence, Applicant, rcvd 9 May 06.
CATHLYNN B. SPARKS
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02758
Although an Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) recommended her permanent retirement in 2006, she appeared before a formal PEB (FPEB), who recommended her return to duty. Based on the medical evidence and the applicant’s testimony, the FPEB recommended that she be returned to duty. Due to the wide variance between the IPEB’s unfit finding and recommendation that she be permanently retired with a compensable rating of 30 percent and the FPEB’s finding her fit for duty and...
The Board concluded that, because the applicant was undergoing disability processing for his unfitting medical condition at the same time he was being processed for an administrative discharge for a personality disorder that was not a physical disability, he should have been processed as a "dual action" case in accordance with AFI 36-3212. I n applicant's case, while his disability case was being processed, Kessler AFB Discharge Authority separated applicant under the administrative...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03698
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-03698 INDEX CODE: 110.01 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES Mandatory Case Completion Date: 7 Jun 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His date of separation be changed to reflect an effective date of 18 Feb 76, rather than 1 Sep 77. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case;...
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD-2012-00129
Examination revealed exquisite tenderness to palpation of the LUQ, but the abdomen was soft.Gait was normal and the CI was noted to sit comfortably.A psychiatric NARSUMexamination performed on 7 November 2007, 3 months prior to separation, performed at the direction of SAFPC, determined that there was no evidence of a psychiatric disorder as the cause of her pain, and further noted that her pain had improved significantly in response to an abdominal muscle strengthening program. The PEB and...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03246
On 6 January 2004, AFPC/DPPD indicated in a letter to SAFPC/AFPB the disability processing records revealed a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) was initiated on 6 March 2003, and the results referred to the IPEB for adjudication of the case. Evaluation in the disability system concluded with a recommendation for disability discharge with severance pay; however, the administrative discharge was executed without consideration by the SAFPC as a dual action case. We note at the time the applicant...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00068
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00068 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 14 July 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: She receive another review of her medical evaluation board evaluation (MEB). ____________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPDS recommends the requested relief...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01947
________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: AFPC/DPPD recommends the application be denied, and states, in part the applicant was processed through the Disability Evaluation System (DES) and was found unfit for continued military service based on asthma which existed prior to service. The applicant contends the determination that her asthma existed prior to her service was solely based on the single sentence in the MEB that she reported using an...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01789
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She was diagnosed with thyroid cancer, which provided clinical evidence that she had a real medical problem that produced the symptoms and conditions used to suggest the diagnosis of Dysthymia and Personality Disorder. She was diagnosed with thyroid cancer only four months after her discharge from the Air Force. The BCMR Medical Consultant concludes that the applicant’s diagnosis of personality...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01651
On 15 May 12, the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) considered the applicants case as a dual-action case and determined the applicant should be discharged by execution of the approved discharge action for misconduct. DPFD states the preponderance of evidence reflects that no error or injustice occurred during the disability process or at the time of separation. The complete DPFD evaluation is at Exhibit...
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...