RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02195
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her DD Form 214, Certificate of Discharge or Release from Active
Duty, be corrected to reflect the following:
1. Her narrative reason for separation be changed from
Disability Existed Prior to Service to Disability Incurred While
in Service.
2. Her characterization be changed from uncharacterized to
honorable.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Her DD Form 214 erroneously states the disability for which she
was discharged existed prior to service. She never informed any
physician that these conditions existed prior to her enlistment.
Her disabilities were rated service connected by the Department
of Veterans Affairs (DVA) and she is being denied DVA
educational benefits because of the incorrect information listed
on her DD Form 214.
In support of her appeal, the applicant provides a copy of her
DD Form 214, a copy of her entry exam and her VA rating.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Air Force on 1 August 2006.
According to the documentation provided by the applicant, she
presented for medical care on 18 August 2006 with complaints of
right ankle pain where she was treated and returned to basic
military training. On 13 September 2006, she was taken out of
training and placed on medical hold. On 21 September 2006, a
bone scan revealed stress fractures of the left pelvis and
bilateral feet. It was determined that she required a Medical
Evaluation Board for her injuries.
According to HQ AFPC/DPSDD, the Informal Physical Evaluation
Board (IPEB) reviewed the case and determined the applicants
conditions were unfitting for continued military service. They
also determined the conditions existed prior to service. The
applicant was notified and concurred with the decision of the
IPEB on or about 2 November 2006.
The applicant was discharged on 8 November 2006. Her service
was uncharacterized and her narrative reason for separation was
listed as Disability Existed Prior to Service. She was credited
with serving 3 months and 8 days on active duty.
________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSDD recommends denial. The documentation provided by the
applicant is inadequate to perform a comprehensive review. On
20 June 2011, DPSDD contacted the applicant and requested she
provide the AF-356, Findings and Recommended Disposition of USAF
Physical Evaluation Board, as well as the second page of the
narrative summary. As of 20 July 2011, DPSDD had not received
the additional documentation. The applicant has not provided
evidence to support her contention that an error or injustice
occurred during the disability process.
The complete DPSDD evaluation is at Exhibit C.
AFPC/DPSIT does not provide a recommendation. Participation in
the Montgomery GI Bill, for individuals released from active
duty, requires an honorable discharge. Changing the applicants
character of service to honorable will have an impact on her
educational benefits.
The complete DPSIT evaluation is at Exhibit D.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the
applicant on 16 September 2011, for review and comment within
30 days (Exhibit E). 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 error or injustice. We took notice
of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of
the case; however, we find no evidence of an error or injustice
that occurred during the discharge process. Based on the
available evidence of record, it appears the discharge was
consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge
regulation and within the commander's discretionary authority.
The applicant has provided no evidence, which would lead us to
believe the characterization of the service was contrary to the
provisions of the governing regulation, or unduly harsh.
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find
no basis upon which to recommend granting the relief sought.
________________________________________________________________
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-2011-02195 in Executive Session on 10 November 2011,
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number
BC-2011-02195 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 24 May 11, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSDD, dated 20 Jul 11.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSIT, dated 29 Aug 11.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 16 Sep 11.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2006-02940
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The AFBCMR Medical Consultant is of the opinion that a change in the applicant’s records is warranted to reflect a disability rating of 30 percent with a permanent disability retirement. The complete AFBCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 27 Jul 07, a copy of the Air Force...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02228
The IPEB noted that she had declined further “ablation surgery.” On 9 March 2006, the applicant concurred with the findings and recommended disposition of the IPEB. The complete AFBCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit G. _________________________________________________________________ 5 APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF THE ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 15 Feb 13, by letter, the applicant amended her request and now ask to be medically retired instead of being returned to duty. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02867
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSDD recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. The DVA awards service connection for claimed disability but does not make a determination as to whether conditions are combat...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01219
Additional relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force. As of this date, this office has received no response. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-01219 in Executive Session on 16 Nov 11, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-00457
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-00457 INDEX CODE: 108.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The 10 percent disability rating he received from the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) be added to his 20 percent disability rating in order to award him permanent disability retirement. The Medical Consultant states in order...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-03494
The DPSD complete evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 8 Apr 11 for review and comment within 30 days. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03343
The severance pay he is receiving is not for a combat related injury. SAFPC noted: "The Board considered the member's contention/or permanent retirement at 30 percent disability rating and concurred with the disposition recommended by the previous boards to discharge the member with severance pay with a disability rating of 10 percent." At no time during the appeal process of his case did the applicant request the injury to his shoulder be rated as a combat related injury.
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03113
Further, it must be noted that the service disability boards must rate disabilities based on the individual's condition at the time of evaluation. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPD recommends the requested relief be denied. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial noting that while there may have been sufficient evidence...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC 2009 00052
The AFBCMR Medical Consultant states even though PTSD may not have been an available diagnosis at the time of the applicant's military service, a mental health professional would have/should have been able to extract and list any signs and symptoms believed to be the result of an identifiable trauma, and to include these in the narrative summary if they were present at the time of evaluation. The AFBCMR Medical Consultant's complete evaluation is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-02597
The Air Force Informal Physical Evaluations Board’s (IPEB) determination that she be discharged from active service in the Air National Guard with a 20 percent disability was in error because the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA), “[u]sing the same medical records and statements less than six months later,” rated her disability at 50 percent. The IPEB reviewed the request and determined that these two conditions, in and of themselves, are not unfitting conditions and therefore would not...