RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-03444
INDEX CODE: 110.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of “2Q” be changed to one that would
allow him to reenlist.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His medical situation has been corrected. The discharge code is preventing
his return to service.
The applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant entered active duty on 12 Aug 98 as an aircraft electronic and
environmental systems journeyman. He began suffering from a degenerative
back condition and was unable to perform normal daily activities due to
pain and medication.
The applicant was referred to the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB)
on 4 Feb 05, for chronic lower back pain associated with disc disease,
status post lumbar facet denervation. The IPEB recommended discharge with
severance pay with a disability rating of 10 percent. The member requested
a hearing with the Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB). On 18 Mar 05,
member met the Board with legal counsel. The FPEB recommended discharge
with severance pay with a disability rating of 20 percent. Member rebutted
the findings to the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC)
requesting permanent disability retirement with a 40 percent disability
rating. The SAFPC reviewed the findings of both Boards and concurred with
the recommendation of the FPEB for discharge with severance pay at a 20
percent disability rating. SAFPC noted they found no evidence to justify
overturning the decision of the FPEB. They also noted member’s normal
lower extremity sensory-motor function, bilateral negative straight-leg
raise test, symmetrical deep tendon reflexes, and normal “coordinated”
gait. A message was sent which established the discharge date of 18 Jul
05. Member served 6 years, 11 months, and 7 days of active military
service.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPD recommends denial. The preponderance of evidence reflects
that no error or injustice occurred during the disability process or at the
time of separation. DPPD stated 2Q is the correct reenlistment eligibility
status code for a person who was approved for a medical retirement or
separation.
The DPPD complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 9 Nov 07, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant for review and comment within 30 days. To date, a response has
not been received.
_________________________________________________________________
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. 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 Air Force office of primary
responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that
the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. No
evidence has been provided to reflect he was not treated fairly and
properly by the Air Force and all procedures were followed. In view of the
above and absent evidence to the contrary, we find no 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 Docket Number BC-2007-
03444 in Executive Session on 16 Jan 08, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
Ms. Patricia R. Collins, Member
Ms. Audrey Y. Davis, Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number BC-2007-
03444 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 29 Sep 07.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSD, dated 1 Nov 07.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Nov 07.
CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02816
The FPEB reviewed the evidence presented and recommended discharge with severance pay with a disability rating of 10 percent. Under Title 10, U.S.C., Physical Evaluation Boards must determine if a member’s condition renders them unfit for continued military service relating to their office, grade, rank or rating. The AFPC/DPPD complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air...
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 | CY2008 | BC-2007-01005
The AFPC/DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit C. The BCMR Medical Consultant is of the opinion that the applicant’s total combined permanent disability percentage should be increased from 40 to 60 percent to reflect the severe nature of his bilateral foot pain, which prevented him from reasonably performing his military duties. In the applicant’s case, the Air Force limited its unfit finding to his bilateral foot condition since that was the only condition limiting the performance of his military...
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 | 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 | 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 | CY2008 | BC-2007-02793
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The Air Force Informal Physical Evaluation Board’s (IPEB) determination that he be medically discharged from the Air Force with a 20 percent disability rating was in error because the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) subsequently awarded him a 90 percent disability rating for his service-connected disabilities. The regulation governing the Air Force’s disability evaluation system, AFI 36-3212,...
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...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03444
On 3 Mar 10, the applicant non-concurred with the findings and recommendations of the IPEB contending that his condition did not make him unfit for duty, and requested a formal hearing of the case. On 6 May 10, the Air Force Personnel Council, on behalf of the Secretary of the Air Force, directed the applicant be separated from active service with severance pay for physical disability. The applicants DD Form 214 reflects his RE code at the time of separation.
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02223
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02223 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of 2Q (Personnel medically retired or discharged) be changed to allow reentry in the military. On 20 Mar 09, the Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB) reviewed the case file with medical records and determined the ulcerative colitis was unfitting with a disability rating of...