RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00695
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be given a medical discharge in lieu of his administrative
discharge for exceeding weight standards.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
At the time of his discharge, he experienced the need to eat
often throughout the day to keep from getting sick. He was an
undiagnosed diabetic, which explains his health issue. He was
not given a physical examination prior to his administrative
discharge board hearing. If he were given a medical examination
it would have revealed that he was suffering from diabetes.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides an expanded
statement and copies of excerpts from his medical records.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Information provided by the applicant indicates that he served
in the Air Force Reserve in the grade of staff sergeant (E-5).
Available records indicate that an administrative discharge
board convened on 1 Aug 83 to determine whether the applicant
should have been discharged from the Air Force Reserve due to
exceeding the weight standards outlined in AFR 35-11, The Weight
Management Program (WMP). After carefully considering all the
evidence, including the applicants argument that his medical
condition interfered with his ability to lose weight, the board
determined that its findings warranted the applicants
separation from the Air Force Reserve with an honorable
discharge certificate.
________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFRC/A1K recommends denial, indicating the applicant has failed
to provide any evidence of his having diabetes, or having been
diagnosed with diabetes, at the time of his discharge.
A complete copy of the AFRC/A1K evaluation is at Exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant provides an expanded statement indicating that he
was diagnosed with borderline diabetes in the late 1970s and
was diagnosed with Type II diabetes in Dec 04, as well as copies
of his administrative discharge board record of board
proceedings and excerpts from his medical records.
A complete copy of the applicants response, with attachments,
is at Exhibit E.
________________________________________________________________
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. We took
notice of the applicant's complete submission, including his
response to the Air Force evaluation, 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 the applicant has not
been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, in the
absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis for us to
recommend granting the relief sought in this application.
4. The applicants case is adequately documented and it has not
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel
will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved.
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably
considered.
________________________________________________________________
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 AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2010-00695 in Executive Session on 23 Nov 10, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 16 Feb 10, w/aches.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Available Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFRC/A1K, dated 16 Jul 10.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Aug 10.
Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, 1 Sep 10, w/atchs.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2008-02939
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the BCMR Medical Consultant at Exhibit H. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFRC/A1K defers to the appropriate office in regards to the applicant’s request for a medical retirement. His left knee injury was recorded as occurring “while in college.” He received periodic non-flying medical...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02444
A complete copy of the AFRC/SGP evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFRC/A1K recommends denial, indicating the applicant has not provided any supporting documentation that substantiates that a DD Form 214 should have been issued for the period of service in question (i.e., active duty orders reflecting that she completed 90 continuous days or more of active duty, or reflecting that she has been involuntarily mobilized during the event of a national emergency or war under 10 USC 12301, 12302, 12304,...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02769
In support of his request, the applicant provides a statement from counsel and copies of excerpts of his military personnel records and civilian and service medical records pertaining to his LOD Determination, Medical Evaluation Board (MEB), Physical Evaluation Board (PEB), and subsequent permanent retirement for physical disability. The applicant contends that his 2004 LOD injury rendered him unfit to perform his duties and, thus, he should have been retained on active duty until he was...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-02002
Subsequently, it was determined the former content of AFI 2503, Administrative Demotion of Airman, and AFI 36-2502, Airman Promotion Program, dated 6 Aug 02, would continue to be used as the procedural guidance to implement the AFR Enlisted Demotion and Promotion Policy. We took note of the applicant’s arguments regarding the validity of the demotion instructions ,however, we agree with AFRC/A1K recommendation that the use of the former AFI 36-2503 and Air 36-2502 as the procedural guidance...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03317
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty; medical records, letters of support, and other various documents associated with his request. Thus none of these conditions are In the Line of Duty (ILOD) as applied to Air Force disability retirement. The complete BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANTS REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01051
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01051 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: She be paid Incapacitation Pay, in behalf of her late husband, for the period 1 October 2009 through 13 January 2010. We note the Air Force offices of primary responsibility recommend granting the decedents widow incapacitation pay for the requested...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04052
He be credited with the time remaining to secure 20 years of active duty service and a Regular Air Force retirement, or he be recalled to active duty status to allow him to receive a Regular Air Force retirement. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Counsel notes that the applicant concurs with the recommendation to grant the requested relief and reaffirms the appropriate relief is to grant the applicant constructive service credit from the date of removal from active duty to the...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-00062
He was eventually diagnosed with an Antiphospholipid Antibody Syndrome and on 25 August 2006 a LOD determination was completed with the finding that his condition existed prior to service (EPTS) thus making him ineligible for medical retirement. The Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) found the applicant unfit for continued military service and determined his condition was EPTS; however, the Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB) determined the applicant was unfit for duty but...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01457
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01457 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be granted a waiver for being twice deferred for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel (O-5) while on Active duty so he may transfer to the Air Force Reserve (AFR). Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an injustice with regards to the applicants request for a...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01278
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFRC/A1K concurs with the recommendation from AFRC/RMG to deny the applicants request for pay and points for the period May Jul 13. We took notice of the applicants 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 the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice. Exhibit D. Letter,...