ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-02303
INDEX CODE: 100.03 & 100.06
XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Reentry Code of “2Q” be changed to allow his reentry into the armed
forces.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was medically discharged for a pre-existing condition, i.e., kidney
stones; however, the kidney stones he had while deployed to Iraq were due
to the environment and lifestyle of desert warfare, rather than his pre-
existing condition. Since his deployment to Iraq, he has had no more
episodes or pain due to kidney stones.
In support of his request for reconsideration, the applicant submits his
personal statement and a statement from a civilian physician indicating
that in spite of his history, it is unlikely that he will be prevented from
living a normal life.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit F.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Fore on 4 June 2002, for a period of
four years.
Based on renal colic on 5 and 18 December 2003, resulting in the passing of
kidney stones while deployed to Iraq, the applicant was presented to a
Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). On 6 May 2004, the MEB established a
diagnosis of recurrent nephrolithiasis (kidney stones) and recommended that
he be referred to an Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB). On 21 May
2004, an IPEB sustained the diagnosis of the MEB, found him unfit for
continued military service, determined the condition existed prior to
service (EPTS) without service aggravation, and recommended his discharge.
On 28 May 2004, he agreed with the findings and recommendation of the IPEB
and waived his right to a Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB). On
1 June 2004, the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC)
announced the decision of the Secretary of the Air Force to direct his
discharge.
He was honorably discharged on 20 July 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-
3208 (Disability, EPTS) and issued a Reentry Code of “2Q - Personnel
medically retired or discharged.” He completed 2 years, 1 month, and 17
days of active service.
On 27 September 2006, the Board considered his request to change his RE
code of “2Q” to allow his reentry into the armed forces. The Board found
insufficient evidence to warrant favorable consideration and denied his
request. For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the
applicant’s separation, and the rationale of the earlier decision by the
Board, see the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit E.
In an application, dated 22 May 2007, submitted through his congressman’s
office, the applicant submitted a request for reconsideration. The
applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit F.
________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of error or injustice. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence
of record and the additional documentation submitted by applicant, to
include a statement from a civilian physician, we remain unpersuaded that
his RE code of “2Q - Personnel medically retired or discharged” incorrectly
identifies the circumstances surrounding his medical discharge. Although
the statement from the civilian physician indicates that in spite of the
applicant’s history of nephrolithiasis (kidney stones) it is unlikely that
he will be prevented from living a normal life, it does not refute the fact
that under the adverse conditions of deployed military operational
environments, his underlying kidney abnormality makes the formation of
kidney stones an almost certainty due to dehydration and the inability to
control dietary factors. To the contrary, the statement indicates that he
is prone to develop more kidney stones as a result of his kidneys not
handling calcium properly. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the
contrary, we again find no compelling basis to recommend granting the
relief sought in this application.
________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the additional 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 Docket Number BC-2005-02303
in Executive Session on 24 July 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Patricia J. Zarodkiewicz, Vice Chair
Mr. Jeffery R. Shelton, Member
Ms. Dee R. Reardon, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit E. Letter, Sen Craig, dated 4 Jun 07, w /atchs.
Exhibit F. DD Form 149, dated 22 May 07, w/atchs.
PATRICIA J. ZARODKIEWICZ
Vice Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02303
________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was medically discharged for a pre-existing condition, i.e., kidney stones; however, the kidney stones he had while deployed to Iraq were due to the environment and lifestyle of desert warfare, rather than his pre- existing condition. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant is of the opinion that no change to the records is...
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00798
The Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) adjudicated the recurrent nephrolithiasis and temporomandibular joint disorder conditions as unfitting, rated 20% and 0%, with application of the Veteran’s Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) and SECNAVINST 1850.4E. After a VA dental rating examination was completed in January 2004, the rating was increased to 10% effective 30 September 2003 based on the maximal inter-incisal range of 36mm documented on that examination. Service Treatment Record
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02303
On 7 November 2001, the Secretary of the Air Force directed the applicant be separated from active service for physical disability due to a condition that existed prior to military service. She received an RE code of 2Q - Personnel medically retired or discharged and an SPD code of JFM - Disability Existed Prior to Service, PEB. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant recommended denial indicating the applicant...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040009626C070208
The applicant requests, in effect, that his recommended disability percentage be increased from 20 percent to a higher percentage on his 7 May 2004 physical evaluation board (PEB). Army Regulation (AR) 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation) establishes the Army Physical Disability Evaluation System (PDES) and sets forth policies, responsibilities, and procedures that apply in determining whether a Soldier is unfit because of physical disability to reasonably...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-01130
On 5 Sep 86, the Formal PEB (FPEB) found him unfit for duty with a diagnosis of coronary artery disease and hypercalciuric nephrolithiasis and recommended he be placed on the TDRL with a compensable percentage of 100%. There is little doubt his service connected medical conditions occurred while in service performing duties related to his Air Force specialty. The DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01811
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01811 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His disability discharge, with severance pay (DWSP) be changed to a medical retirement. Upon discharge, he immediately filed and was awarded a 50 percent combined rating from the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) for bipolar disorder, major...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050000810C070206
He also indicated that his recruiter asked him about his medical condition and he had informed him that he did not have any medical condition. There is no evidence, and the applicant submitted none, to support his allegation that the Army sent him to Albany, New York, to reenlist; that he was scheduled to take a mini medical examination but was later told he had to undergo a full physical examination and obtain a waiver from the SGA; that a request for waiver was submitted ; that he waited...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050000810C070206
He also indicated that his recruiter asked him about his medical condition and he had informed him that he did not have any medical condition. There is no evidence, and the applicant submitted none, to support his allegation that the Army sent him to Albany, New York, to reenlist; that he was scheduled to take a mini medical examination but was later told he had to undergo a full physical examination and obtain a waiver from the SGA; that a request for waiver was submitted ; that he waited...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050000810C070206
The applicant states that he was discharged on 30 June 2003 from active duty (AD) with a medical discharge for glomerulonephritis, a kidney disease. He also indicated that his recruiter asked him about his medical condition and he had informed him that he did not have any medical condition. The evidence shows that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-40, chapter 5, for disability, EPTS- Medical Board.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02111
The IPEB recommended the applicant be discharged. The 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 11 Aug 06 for review and comment within 30 days. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the BCMR Medical Consultant...