Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-00433
Original file (BC-2009-00433.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-00433 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

1. Her uncharacterized character of service be changed to a 
medical discharge. 

 

2. She receive an examination for the purpose of finding her 
degree of disability, for which she may be eligible to receive 
benefits. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

It is very clear in her records that she had a problem before 
being sent to Germany and she was separated because she was 
getting close to the 180 days needed to obtain benefits. She 
believes her condition was found early in her service and it was 
not dealt with in a proper manner. 

 

In support of her request, the applicant provides a personal 
statement and documents extracted from her military personnel 
records. 

 

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit A. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 4 February 
2003. She served as a Supply Management Apprentice. 

 

On 24 June 2003, the applicant was notified by her commander of 
his intent to recommend that she be discharged from the Air Force 
under the provisions of AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-3208, paragraph 
5.11.9. The specific reason is a staff psychiatrist, Life Skills 
Support Center, diagnosed the applicant as having an Adjustment 
Disorder with Mixed Depression and Anxious Mood, Generalized 
Anxiety disorder which existed prior to entry, and Post Traumatic 
Stress Disorder which existed prior to entry. These disorders 
significantly impaired her ability to function in a military 
environment. The development of suicidal ideation as a way of 


coping with the stress of life in the military led to the 
applicant being unable to perform her duties. 

 

She was advised of her rights in this matter and acknowledged 
receipt of the notification. After consulting with counsel, the 
applicant elected not to submit statements on her own behalf. 

 

In a legal review of the case file, the staff judge advocate 
found the case legally sufficient and recommended discharge. 

 

On 5 July 2003, the discharge authority concurred with the 
recommendations and directed an entry-level separation. 

 

The applicant was discharged on 18 July 2003. She served 
5 months and 15 days on active duty. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial. The AFBCMR 
Medical Consultant states the onset of shin splints during Basic 
Military Training (BMT) is a common ailment, it generally does 
not constitute a permanent impairment unless there is evidence of 
stress fractures; as would be diagnosed by bone scan. When 
stress fractures are diagnosed during military service, the 
individual may be eligible for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) 
and further processing through the Disability Evaluation System 
(DES). The applicant has provided no evidence that she incurred 
stress fractures. Individuals who incur so-called shin splints 
and are unable to complete BMT, are more often than not released 
from military service (entry-level separation) and allowed an 
opportunity to later re-enter the service after resolution of 
symptoms for a sufficient period. The AFBCMR Medical Consultant 
notes the reason for the applicant’s separation was related to a 
mental impairment and while PTSD and Generalized Anxiety Disorder 
(GAD) could qualify for processing through the DES, the fact that 
both were determined existed prior to entry (EPTE), more likely 
than not would result in a finding of unfit, but a separation 
without disability compensation, under Chapter 61, Title 10, 
United States Code, for a condition determined to have existed 
prior to service. 

 

Although listed in the Veterans Administration Schedule for 
Rating Disabilities as a ratable and compensable disorder, an 
Adjustment Disorder is not considered a compensable disorder by 
the Department of Defense, and thus, if interfering sufficiently 
with military service, may be the cause for involuntary 
administrative separation. 

 


Provisions for entry-level separations were established for 
members who are unable to complete the initial requirements of 
military service, whether due to a mental or physical impairment, 
conduct, or unsatisfactory performance of duty, when processed 
within the first 180 days of service. 

 

The AFBCMR Medical Consultant’s complete evaluation, with 
attachment, is at Exhibit C. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

On 15 December 2009, a copy of the AFBCMR Medical Consultant’s 
evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment 
within 30 days (Exhibit D). 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 not timely filed; however, it is in the 
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. 

 

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, we believe that relief is not warranted and the 
applicant has not provided any evidence which would lead us to 
believe otherwise. Her contentions are duly noted; however, the 
detailed comments provided by the AFBCMR Medical Consultant 
adequately address these allegations. Therefore, we agree with 
the opinion and recommendation of the AFBCMR Medical Consultant 
and adopt his rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the 
applicant has failed to sustain her burden of proof that she has 
suffered either an error or an injustice. In the absence of 
evidence to the contrary, we find no 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 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-2009-00433 in Executive Session on 28 January 2010, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number 2009-00433 was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 31 January 2009, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Record. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, dated 

 10 December 2009, w/atch. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 December 2009. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair 

 

 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 9900968

    Original file (9900968.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 30 Jan 98, the applicant was given an entry level separation from the Air National Guard and as a Reserve of the Air Force under the provisions of AFI 36-3209 (Erroneous Enlistment). After a thorough review of the available evidence, we are not persuaded that the applicant’s entry level separation based on the termination of her initial active duty training should be changed to a disability discharge. Therefore, we recommend that the applicant’s narrative reason for separation from the...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012-00119

    Original file (PD2012-00119.docx) Auto-classification: Approved

    I have been (ever since my Army separation undergoing treatment with VA for my disabilities. Bilateral Shin Splints Condition . Therefore, the Board deliberated three rating recommendations, which are all compliant with VASRD §4.71a: 1) A bilateral rating of 10%, coded 5022 (periostitis); 2) Separate 10% ratings, coded with preferred analogous VASRD code 5262-5022 (tibia and fibula, impairment of) for the rating of shin splints conceding §4.40 (“a part which becomes painful on use must be...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01728

    Original file (PD2012 01728.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board’s authority as defined in DoDI 6044.40, however, resides in evaluating the fairness of DES fitness determinations and rating decisions for disability at the time of separation. The Board then considered its rating recommendation for the unfitting right and left shin splint conditions at the time of separation. The MEB forwarded the right foot pain condition as medically acceptable.The right foot condition was reviewed and considered by the Board.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 00955

    Original file (PD2012 00955.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The bilateral lower leg conditions, characterized as “bilateral tibial periostitis” and “right femoral stress fracture,” were forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) . The CI was returned to full activity however she experienced recurrent activity limiting pain in the shins and right femur with a physical training test and battle stations exercise and MEB was initiated.The MEB narrative summary physical examination, 22 October 2001, noted the CI complained of bilateral shin pain...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01179

    Original file (PD2012 01179.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    RATING COMPARISON : ServiceIPEB – Dated 20030221VA -( 2 weeks Pre-Separation)ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Bilateral Medial Tibial Plateau Stress FractureR-5003-5262 L-5003-526210% 0%Stress Fracture, Lt. Medial Tibial Plateau and FemoralCondyle526220%*20030303Bilateral Medial Femoral Condyles Stress FractureCAT IIIStress Fracture, Right. It is noted for the record that the Board is subject to the same laws for disability entitlements as those under which the Disability...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01512

    Original file (PD2012 01512.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The leg, hipand knee conditions, characterized as “bilateral shin splints,” “right tibial plafond stress reaction,” “bilateral femoral stress reactions,” and “left greater trochanteric bursitis & PFPS [patellofemoral pain syndrome],” were forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW SECNAVINST 1850.4E. Bilateral Leg PainCondition (includes Bilateral Shin Splints,Bilateral Femoral Stress Reactions, Left Greater Trochanteric Bursitis, and Left PFPS) :The narrative summary, 4 months...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02790

    Original file (PD-2013-02790.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Informal PEB (IPEB) adjudicated patellofemoral pain, bilateral knee, rated 0% with likely application of the US Army Physical Disability Agency (USAPDA) pain policy; and the left tibial stress fracture as unfitting, rated 0% with likely application of the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).The remaining conditions (back, left hip and asthma) were determined to be not unfitting. The examiner noted tenderness over the left shin.At the VA C&P exam performed 2 months prior to...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00973

    Original file (PD2010-00973.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The MEB and narrative summary (NARSUM) exam at four months prior to separation noted that the CI complained of chronic pain in the shin and foot, was unable to run without pain and rated this pain as 3-4 out of 10, with 10 being the worst. The Board noted that the CI’s condition was only somewhat improved by arch supports and there was no painful motion of the ankle or abnormal gait at the VA exam. In the matter of the right hip, right knee and migraine headaches conditions, and any other...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00492

    Original file (PD2011-00492.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The ratings for unfitting conditions will be reviewed in all cases. Bilateral Lower Leg Condition. Service Treatment Record.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01100

    Original file (PD2012 01100.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    No other conditions were submitted.The PEB adjudicated “bilateral foot and tibial pain”as a single unfitting condition, rated 0%,under criteria of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).The CI made no appeals, and was medically separated. Members first deliberated if the bilateral foot and bilateral tibial conditions were reasonably justified as separately unfitting. In the matter of the servicecombined bilateral tibial and bilateral foot conditions, the Board by a...