RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-001852
INDEX CODE: 112.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 20 DEC 07
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He desires to reenlist. He states during his discharge briefing he was led
to believe that if he were to appeal the medical board decision his
percentage and separation pay would be cut. If he had been aware of all of
his options he would have appealed the decision.
In support of his request, the applicant provided a character reference
letter and documentation extracted from his military personnel record.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
A Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) convened on 15 January 2004 and referred
his case to an Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) with a diagnosis
of right knee pain and right hip trochanteric bursitis. On 24 March 2004,
the IPEB found him unfit for further military service based on a diagnosis
of chronic right knee pain secondary to degeneration of posterior horn of
medial meniscus status post arthroscopy. The IPEB recommended that he be
discharged with a combined compensable rating of 20%. The applicant agreed
with the findings and recommended disposition of the IPEB. The Office of
the Secretary of the Air Force directed that he be discharged with
severance pay effective 14 May 2004 under the provisions of AFI 36-3212.
He served 6 years, 3 months, and 24 days on active duty. He received an RE
code of 2Q – personnel medically retired or discharged.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPD recommends denial. DPPD states the preponderance of evidence
reflects that no error or injustice occurred during the disability process
or at the time of separation. “2Q” is the correct RE code for a person who
is approved for a medical retirement or separation.
The DPPD complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 14 July 2006, the evaluation was forwarded to the applicant 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 timely filed.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of an error or injustice. After a thorough review of the
evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, it is our opinion that
given the circumstances surrounding his separation from the Air Force, the
RE code assigned (2Q) was proper and in compliance with the appropriate
directives. The applicant has not provided any evidence which would lead
us to believe otherwise. Therefore, we agree with the office of primary
responsibility and adopt its rational as the basis for our conclusion that
the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. In the
absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to
recommend granting the relief sought.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the
existence of an error or an injustice; the application was denied without a
personal appearance; and 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-2006-
01852 in Executive Session on 22 August 2006, under the provisions of AFI
36-2603:
Mr. Robert H. Altman, Panel Chair
Ms. Karen A. Holloman, Member
Mr. Wallace F. Beard Jr., Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 2 Jun 06, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 29 Jun 06.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Jul 06.
ROBERT H. ALTMAN
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01425
He did not agree with the IPEB findings and recommendations and requested a Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB). _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPD recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that a preponderance of the evidence reflects that no error or injustice occurred during the disability process and at the time of the applicant’s separation. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 2 Jun 06.
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02251
On 15 Jun 06, he underwent a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). On 23 Jun 06, the IPEB recommended discharge for a condition that existed prior to service. DPPD states the evidence reflects no error or injustice occurred during the disability process or at the time of separation, and the applicant received the appropriate RE code for an individual who is approved for a medical separation or retirement.
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02419
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant's military records, are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force at Exhibit C, D and F. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPD recommends denial. The complete BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit F. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01784
The BCMR Medical Consultant states the applicant contends he did not experience depression prior to entering the service, but the only medical documentation available for review clearly reports a history of depressive symptoms for several years prior to entering military service. While the episode of depression leading to discharge began while on active duty, the reported pre-service history of depressive symptoms is consistent with recurrent depressive disorder and is reinforced by the...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01851
A Medical Board Report, dated 21 August 2003, diagnosed the applicant with migraines and referred her records to an Informal Physical Evaluation board (IPEB). On 11 September 2003, the Secretary of the Air Force directed the applicant be separated from active duty for physical disability due to a condition that existed prior to service. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not...
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 | CY2008 | BC-1997-03689-2
His medical condition has changed and improved since his last evaluation by the Air Force in March 1996. The ROTC cadet command referred back to his original Medical Evaluation Board ruling without consideration of his improved condition. The BCMR Medical Consultant notes that while the applicant reports he has improved his exercise tolerance, asthma is a condition that can remain symptom free over extended periods (as evidenced by his recurrence of asthma on active duty after over 10...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00677
According to the Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) report, Applicant was seen on 19 Jan 97 in the medical clinic for pain to his left knee. He was discharged on 1 May 97 with an RE code of “2Q.” _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPD recommends denial of Applicant’s request. Applicant failed to provide supporting evidence that his left knee problem did not exist prior to his military service.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03539
DPPD states the preponderance of evidence reflects that no error or injustice occurred during the disability process at the time of separation. DPPAE states after review of the evidence submitted by the applicant and review of her records, there is no evidence of error or injustice surrounding her discharge. The DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02289
Since being placed on, and then removed from the TDRL, the documented inconsistencies within the Air Force and Air Force Reserve are working against him to continue to serve his country. He had 17 years, 3 months, and 22 days of military service for basic pay _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPD recommended denial and stated the prepondence of evidence reflects that no injustice occurred during his processing to separate under...