RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01720
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His reenlistment (RE) code of 2Q (personnel medically retired or
discharged) be changed.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He is able to serve in the Air Force or any other willing
branch.
He had surgery to remove his tonsils and has been able to
exercise with no further problems.
In support of his request, the applicant provides two letters
from his physicians.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant entered the Regular Air Force on 9 Mar 04.
On 5 Jun 08, the applicant was referred to the Informal Physical
Evaluation Board for moderate persistent asthma. The IPEB
recommended that he be discharged Under Other Than Title 10,
Chapter 61, for a condition which existed prior to service
(EPTS). On 12 Jun 08, the applicant non-concurred with the
findings and requested a formal hearing with counsel. On 29 Jul
08, the Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB) reviewed the
case and noted, member required use of his inhaler twice a day
routinely to meet duty requirements; however, member testified
that he stopped using his Albuterol inhaler three-four months
ago, but the medical record does not corroborate this
testimony.
On 29 Jul 08, the FPEB concurred with the IPEB findings and
recommendations. On 21 Aug 08, the applicant non-concurred with
the FPEB findings and recommendation and requested that his case
be reviewed by the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council
(SAFPC).
On 23 Sep 08, SAFPC directed the applicants discharge and
noted, Considering that the member was allowed to enlist only
with a waiver, that his symptoms recurred soon after entry, and
that his sensitivity to dust and pollen will limit his
deployment and assignment options, the Board determined that it
was not a reasonable risk to allow him to continue on active
duty. Further,
the findings that the condition was not in
the line of duty and that it existed prior to service and was
not aggravated by service.
The applicant was discharged on 19 Nov 08, with an honorable
discharge and with the narrative reason for separation of
disability existed prior to service. He is credited with
4 years, 8 months, and 11 days of active military service.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPSD recommends denial. DPSD states the preponderance
of evidence reflects that no error or injustice occurred during
the disability process or at the time of separation.
The complete HQ AFPC/DPSD evaluation is at Exhibit C.
HQ AQFPC/DPSOA recommends denial. DPSOA states the applicants
RE code is based on the SAFPC directed discharge for a physical
disability that existed prior to service.
The complete HQ AFPC/DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the
applicant on 6 Aug 10 for review and comment within 30 days (E).
As of this date, this office has not received a 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 error or injustice. 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 rationale as the basis for our
conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or
injustice. Further, we note the applicant has failed to provide
test results, i.e., Methacholine Challenge Test, showing he does
not have asthma, or other sufficient medical documentation for
review by the BCMR Medical Consultant. Therefore, in the absence
of 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-2010-01720 in Executive Session on 7 December 2010, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 30 Apr 10, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSD, dated 15 Jun 10.
Exhibit D. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSOA, dated 16 Jul 10
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Aug 10.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02488
The complete DPSD evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial. 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 rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04590
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04590 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The 20 percent disability rating he received for his diabetes be increased to 40 percent and he be medically retired with a 40 percent disability rating. The USAF disability boards must rate disabilities based on the service members condition at the time...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01547
On 17 Dec 04, the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) found the applicant unfit for continued service and recommended discharge with severance pay with a 10 percent disability rating for asthma. The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 26 Aug 11, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days. We took...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-01816
The FPEB recommended permanent disability retirement with a 10% disability rating. The BCMR Medical Consultant’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit F. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: In response to the AFPC/DPSD evaluation, counsel responds that the applicant’s rating has to be based on the rating criteria, in other words, the DVA rating chart, rather than pulling a percentage of out thin air and applying it to...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01960
DPSD states the evidence reveals no error or injustice occurred during the disability process or at the time of separation. 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 offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our decision the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of proof of the existence of an error or injustice. Exhibit E. Letter,...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04738
His records be corrected to show that he was retired for physical disabilities and provided a 100 percent combined compensable disability rating rather than medically discharged with severance pay. On 31 Aug 07, the Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB) reviewed the case file and recommended a combined compensable disability rating of 20 percent. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02882
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02882 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reentry (RE) code of 2Q (personnel medically retired or discharged) be changed to a code that allows him to reenlist. On 31 Oct 06, the IPEB concurred with the MEB findings and determined the applicants injury existed prior to service and was...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2011-04143
The Medical Consultant states the applicant's request for a change from a 30 percent to a 100 percent disability rating with medical retirement must be considered in view of the medical evidence available at the time of separation from active duty service and release from the TDRL. Hence, the Medical Consultant identifies no medical basis for the recommendation to retroactively assign a 100 percent disability rating for the applicant's ulcerative colitis. After thoroughly reviewing the...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-01900
The complete DPSD 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 18 Jul 08 for review and comment within 30 days. The BCMR Medical Consultant finds no evidence of an error or injustice that justifies a change of the applicants discharge with severance pay to a medical retirement. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03284
On 15 Dec 63, the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Counsel (SAFPC) reviewed his rebuttal to the FPEB findings and concurred with the IPEB's recommendation. The VA disability rating code initially utilized in 1963 by the PEB was reportedly 9203, indicating "Schizophrenia, paranoid type," and VA rating code 9208 was utilized in the final PEB action, depicting a "Delusional Disorder." The complete BCMR Medical Consultant's evaluation is at Exhibit...