RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-03792
INDEX CODE: 110.00
XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 17 JUNE 2007
______________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His narrative reason for separation (hardship) be changed to a medical
reason.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
During his time in the Air Force he was diagnosed with several ailments
such as diabetes, and multiple knee and ankle surgeries which prevented him
from being deployed. He believes if he would not have left the service
when he did he would have eventually been forced to leave under other than
honorable conditions. Consequently he chose to separate under hardship
reasons instead. He stated at the time there were no derogatory reviews or
appraisals, he was doing well and was attending college with hopes of
becoming a commissioned officer in the Air Force and eventually retiring.
His complete submission, with attachments is at Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 18 November 1992.
On 24 September 2002, he requested an early separation due to financial
hardship via AF Form 31, Airman’s Request for Early Separation/Separation
Based on Change in Service Obligation. On 2 October 2002, his unit
commander recommended approval of his request. On 4 November 2002, his
wing commander approved the request allowing the applicant to separate. On
14 November 2002 he was discharged in the grade of staff sergeant with
service characterized as honorable. He was assigned reenlistment
eligibility code of “4A” which denotes “hardship”.
He served a total of 9 years, 11 months and 27 days on active duty.
________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial. The Medical Consultant
states a review of the medical records confirms the presence of various
medical conditions while in service but the preponderance of evidence of
the record does not indicate that those conditions were unfitting for
continued military service at the time the applicant decided to voluntarily
separate. While these conditions may have later become unfitting with
passage of time if the applicant had not separated, this is not a basis to
retroactively grant disability benefits. Actions and disposition in these
cases are proper and equitable reflecting compliance with Air Force
directives that implement the law, subsequently, the Medical Consultant is
of the opinion that no change in the records is warranted.
The complete BCMR Medical Consultant 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 13
December 2006 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, this
office has received no response (Exhibit D).
________________________________________________________________
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 warranting a change in his honorable
discharge to a medical discharge. Applicant’s contentions are duly noted;
however, we agree with the opinions and recommendation of the BCMR Medical
Consultant and adopt his rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the
applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. While the
applicants records confirms the presence of various medical conditions, the
preponderance of the evidence of record does not indicate that those
conditions were unfitting for continued military service at the time the
applicant decided to voluntary separate. Therefore, in the absence of
evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting
the relief sought in this application.
________________________________________________________________
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 BC-2005-03792 in Executive
Session on 31 January 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Michael J. Maglio, Panel Chair
Ms. Kathy L. Boockholdt, Member
Ms. Sharon B. Seymour, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 5 Dec 05, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. BCMR Medical Consultant Letter, dated 12 Dec 06.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 Dec 06.
MICHAEL J. MAGLIO
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2005-03867
Review of service medical records shows care for various conditions but there is no evidence that any were unfitting at the time of separation or warranted referral into the Disability Evaluation System. The complete Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 15 December 2006 for review and comment within 30...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-00849
The MEB recommended the applicant be referred to an Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB). Medical conditions developing after separation that are granted service connection under presumptions of Title 38 are also not a basis to retroactively grant military disability ratings or compensation. Review of service medicals finds no evidence the applicant had diabetes while in service and no evidence that diabetes was causing symptoms diagnosed as conversion reaction.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2004-03792
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The Air Force Informal Physical Evaluation Board disapproved his medical retirement for an injury incurred while serving in Iraq in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. While we determined that the applicant is not entitled to a disability retirement, sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice warranting a correction to his record to show a...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2001-03678-2
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 H. The applicant’s medical evaluation was completed at Wilford Hall Medical Center on 17 October 2002 and the results were forwarded to the Board for review (refer to Exhibit I). The BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit J. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 16 December 2002.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-01313
___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant opines no change in the records is warranted. The BCMR Medical Consultant concludes evidence of the record shows that the back injury was not the cause for separation, did not render the applicant unfit for continued military service and did not warrant evaluation in the disability evaluation system. ___________________________________________________________________ THE...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02168
Evidence has not been provided by the applicant, which would lead us to believe that she was unfit due to a physical disability at the time of her discharge. Therefore, since there were no disqualifying medical conditions at the time of her separation, we see no reason why she would have been eligible for consideration in the disability evaluation system. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02790
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02790 INDEX CODE: 108.07 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His service-connected medical condition, degenerative arthritis of both hips, hearing loss, and tinnitus, be assessed as combat related in order to qualify for compensation under the Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) Act. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2004-03839
On 6 May 2004, the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) performed a fitness determination only, concluding the applicant was unfit for continued military duty due to asthma. The BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPD recommends denial of the applicant’s request. The DPPD evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03966
In a letter, dated 16 September 1983, the commander notified him that he was recommending his administrative discharge for misconduct, i.e., drug abuse. The BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPD recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that the applicant has failed to provide documentation that an error or injustice occurred at the time of his involuntary administrative discharge generated under the provisions of AFR 39-10. The AFPC/DPPD evaluation...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | Bc-2002-03758
The physical defect or conditions must render the member unfit for duty, and their military career must have been cut short due to the service connected disability. Medical records show that the applicant was treated for various medical conditions throughout his military career. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their...