RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00229 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: YES 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His records be evaluated for medical boarding and entry into the 
Wounded Warrior Program. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

1. During his retirement physical his attending physician stated 
“he was not ready to separate” due to ongoing medical conditions 
for Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI), Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder 
(PTSD), and neck injury. 

 

2. In Nov 08, he was seen by a doctor in the TBI clinic at 
Womack Army Hospital. He had several tests, to include a 
Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), which indicated no signs of 
physical trauma. His wife asked if they could do a MRI with 
contrast to determine if there was any shrinkage or lesions on 
his brain. However, the doctor stated that “they were not 
equipped to do that that kind of testing and the only location 
that could was Duke Hospital in Raleigh, North Carolina, 
however, it was very expensive. 

 

3. He went through the cognitive testing, which resulted in him 
being diagnosed him with TBI. He was given a shot for migraines 
and told to track them on a chart before his next appointment. 
He was seen at physical therapy to measure his balance and 
dizziness. The physical therapist stated he needed to be seen 
by an orthopedic doctor for his neck pain and limited range of 
motion. 

 

4. He was issued a profile by the Army due to his illness; 
however, the Air Force would not accept it because it was 
written by an Army physician and not an Air Force physician. 
The Air Force physician would not put him on a profile. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides a five-page 
list of events and copies of his medical records. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 


STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 31 Aug 10, the applicant voluntarily retired from the Air 
Force in the grade of master sergeant after completing 21 
years, 9 months and 8 days of total active service. 

 

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the letters prepared by the BCMR Medical Consultant 
and the appropriate office of the Air Force, which are attached 
at Exhibits C and F. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

HQ AFPC/DPAMM states the applicant’s medical records do not 
indicate he met the criteria for needing an MEB and entry into 
the wounded warriors program is not under the purview of their 
office. 

 

DPAMM states a review of the applicant’s medical records reveal 
he was followed by mental health providers and diagnosed with 
Anxiety Disorder Not Otherwise Specified (NOS). He was 
repeatedly determined to be worldwide qualified and there was no 
indication in his medical record that mental health was 
considering him for an MEB. In addition, DPAMM has no record of 
ever being contacted to place the applicant on medical hold for 
disability processing. 

 

The applicant’s retirement physical stated he was not cleared 
for separation but the concern appeared to be related to the 
applicant’s pending evaluation of his neck pain. On-going 
evaluation of his neck by orthopedics determined he was a non-
surgical candidate and he was referred to a pain management 
specialist. No MEB action was mentioned or appears indicated 
since the applicant had an approved retirement date and did not 
overcome the presumption of fitness. 

 

The complete DPAMM evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

A copy of the HQ AFPC/DPAMM evaluation was forwarded to the 
applicant on 24 Oct 11 for review and comment within 15 days 
(Exhibit G). As of this date, no response has been received by 
this office. 

 

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial. The Medical 
Consultant states there is a lack of clear and convincing 
evidence of an unfitting condition at the time of retirement 
from active duty service. 

 

The BCMR Medical Consultant opines no objective evidence of TBI 
was present before or at the time of retirement. This opinion 
is consistent with the DVA rating decision which denied service 
connection due to the absence of medical evidence demonstrating 


that a brain injury had occurred during deployment or anytime 
thereafter. Furthermore, the Department of Veterans Affairs 
(DVA) rating report stated, “further psychiatric and 
neuropsychiatric testing indicated your symptoms were not due to 
a traumatic brain injury.” The specialist offers the expert 
opinion that the episodes of dizziness were possibly due to post 
traumatic vertigo not TBI. In considering the functional impact 
of this finding, there is no indication of an inability to 
perform job related duties due to this transient condition. No 
enlisted performance reviews or other documentation were 
provided to support a contention of unfitness or a demonstrated 
inability to perform assigned duties. 

 

Regarding PTSD, the reviewer agrees that documentation does 
support this diagnosis. However, on the matter of whether the 
condition rendered the applicant unfit for duty and thus 
required a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB), there is no objective 
evidence to support this claim (i.e. performance reports or duty 
reassignment, etc). AFI 41-210, Patient Administration 
Functions, paragraph 10.1.3., states, “The existence of a 
physical defect or condition does not of itself necessarily 
provide justification for or entitlement to an MEB. If a member 
has performed his or her duty satisfactorily prior to scheduled 
retirement or an approved separation date, a presumption of 
fitness is established. This presumption of fitness can be 
overcome only if clear and convincing evidence exists to the 
contrary.” No such evidence was submitted documenting the 
existence of inadequate performance of assigned duties post-
deployment or unfitness for duty. 

 

A history of prior neck surgery in 2001 was documented in the 
record. However, there was no indication of any duty limiting 
neurological defects necessitating an MEB for separation due to 
this condition. The presence of medical conditions that were 
unfitting while in service, and were not the cause of separation 
or retirement, that later progressed in severity causing 
disability resulting in service connected DVA compensation is 
not a basis to retroactively grant a military disability 
discharge or disability compensation. 

 

The complete BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit 
D. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

The applicant states he returned from Bagram Air Force Base, 
Afghanistan in Sep 09 and did not realize the extent of his 
injuries until he returned to his job as Production 
Superintendent. He was having trouble remembering things about 
the F-15 aircraft he had worked on for 21 plus years, simple 
tasks and would get lost several times on his way to work. The 
applicant states he reached out to his senior enlisted manager 


for advice and was referred to mental health. His supervisor 
removed him from Production Superintendent to Senior 
Noncommissioned Officer (SNCO) of Aircraft in which he shared 
responsibilities with another SNCO due to his inability to 
recall maintenance and scheduling information, communicate 
maintenance actions and the extensive headaches and pain. 

 

One time he was sent to Womack Army Hospital for TBI testing but 
they deployed his original doctor, so he lost continuity of 
care. His Army doctor put him on a profile, however, his Air 
Force doctor and the Air Force Fitness Center would not accept 
it. The lack of communication between the Army and Air Force 
and the three hour trips to the facility has caused further 
stress and hardship to him and his family. 

 

The applicant’s complete evaluation 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 timely filed. 

 

3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. The 
applicant’s case has undergone an exhaustive review by the BCMR 
Medical Consultant and we note that the applicant disagrees with 
his recommendation. However we do not find the evidence 
provided by the applicant sufficiently persuasive to override 
the rationale provided by the BCMR Medical Consultant. 
Regarding his request for entry into the Air Force Wounded 
Warrior (AFW2) program, since the Medical Consultant found no 
evidence of an unfitting condition at the time of his retirement 
from active duty that would warrant a MEB, there exists no basis 
upon which to direct entry into the AFW2 program. Therefore, we 
agree with the opinion 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. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, 
we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this 
application. 

 

4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not 
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel 
will materially add to the Board's 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-2011-00229 in Executive Session on 15 Nov 11, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 Panel Chair 

 Member 

 Member 

 

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2011-00229 was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 4 Oct 10, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Military Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. AFPC/DPAMM Letter, dated 8 Feb 2011. 

 Exhibit D. AFBCMR Medical Consultant, Letter, dated 

 19 Sep 11. 

 Exhibit E. SAF/MRBC, Letter, dated 23 Sep 11. 

 Exhibit F. Applicant’s Rebuttal, Letter, 4 Oct 11, 

 w/atchs. 

 Exhibit G. SAF/MRBC, Letter, dated 20 Oct 11. 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair