RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02690 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: YES 

 

 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

Her honorable discharge be changed to a medical discharge. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

1. Due to her medical history, the discharge should have been 
classified as a medical discharge. She experienced several 
medical problems that were not taken into consideration during 
the discharge process. She has Poly Cystic Ovarian Syndrome 
(PCOS) with insulin resistance; however, this diagnosis was 
wrongfully taken away by a doctor who misinterpretated her 
symptoms and who was not qualified to do so. Her current doctor 
supports the PCOS diagnosis. She has undergone some treatment to 
elevate her PCOS symptoms. However, the insulin she takes makes 
it hard to lose weight and also can lead to Type 1 Diabetes; she 
was borderline diabetic and was diagnosed with Pituitary Adenoma 
while on active duty. It cannot be proved nor disproved that 
Pituitary Adenoma it causes weight gain. Further, it cannot be 
proved nor disproved that this is the reason she failed to lose 
weight which led to her not meeting physical training standards 
for the Air Force. She continues to undergo treatment and is 
being observed to see if her symptoms change. 

 

2. She had Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass on 2 Dec 09 
which was successful and she now meets military weight standards. 

 

In support of her request, the applicant provides a copy of a 
letter from her current OB/GYN Surgeon and excerpts of her 
medical records. 

 

Her complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

 

 

 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 


 

The applicant enlisted into the Regular Air Force on 28 Jun 05. 
The applicant was notified by her commander that he was 
recommending her for discharge from the Air Force under the 
provisions of AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5.65, for failing in the 
fitness program. The applicant received a Letter of Counseling 
and two Letters of Reprimand (LOR). She received an honorable 
discharge on 17 Apr 08 after serving 2 years, 9 months and 
21 days on active duty. 

 

The Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) awarded the applicant a 
20 percent disability rating for Diabetes mellitus, 10 percent 
rating for PCOS, 10 percent rating for Lumbar Spine Degenerative 
Disease with Strain, 10 percent for an upper back and neck rash 
(acanthosis nigricans), and 0 percent ratings each for Bilateral 
Plantar Fasciitis and for the Benign Pituitary Adenoma. 

 

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the 
Air Force, which is at Exhibit C. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial. The evidence of 
record shows that the applicant’s health care provider conducted 
several diagnostic evaluations, to include an ultrasound of the 
ovaries, a brain MRI scan, and thyroid function studies, in 
search of possible organic cause of her weight problems. The MRI 
scan of the brain demonstrated a 2mm hypodence area which was 
believed to be compatible with a micro adenoma of the pituitary 
gland. The findings on the pelvic ultrasound were reported as 
“normal pelvic ultrasound without evidence of polycystic ovary 
syndrome.” 

 

Her weight fluctuated from 150 pounds to 115 pounds during Basic 
Military Training and then to 130-135 pounds during technical 
school. She reportedly got married at the end of technical 
school and two months later, in Apr 05, her weight “ballooned to 
200 pounds.” She was prescribed Metformin 1000 milligrams twice 
per day for the suspected diagnosis of PCOS; a diagnosis which 
was empirically based upon the changes in the applicant’s 
menstrual cycles. She was referred to an endocrinologist and a 
subsequent medical entry in her records reflects, “Patient with 
normal thyroid function on many checks, no evidence of diabetes 
mellitus (DM) on several checks, non-Cushingoid (normal blood 
pressure, no striate, weight is distrusted over body and not all 
truncal and normal UFC) and no PCOS by definition.” The provider 
discussed a plan of action with regard to monitoring her 
pituitary micro adenoma and encouraged her to continue to 
exercise and suggested dietary modifications. 

 


Further, the applicant “raised significant medical issues” to her 
commander for his consideration in response to the LOR, which the 
commander took time to speak with her medical providers and the 
medical operations squadron commander to obtain an opinion before 
deciding to leave the LOR as is and to continue the Unfavorable 
Information File (UIF) action. 

 

The Medical Consultant notes that the specific paragraph, Failure 
in the Fitness Program, in AFI 3608 states, “Airmen who do not 
meet fitness standards in AFI 10-248, Fitness Program, (formerly 
AFIs 40-501- and 40-502) may be discharged when the failure in 
the fitness program resulted from a cause which was within their 
control. Follow the procedures for failure in the fitness 
program according to AFI 10-248 before starting action to 
discharge. Make sure the case file shows the record of those 
actions.” An additional set of guidelines reads: “Evaluation by 
a military health care provider has ruled out medical conditions 
precluding the member from achieving a passing score.” The 
applicant’s commander indicated that the professional medical 
opinions were taken into consideration and the applicant was held 
responsible for her fitness failures. 

 

It is noted that obesity due to any cause is not considered a 
compensable physical disability. Although she has been issued 
disability compensation for specific medical conditions, the 
evidence does not reflect that either of the conditions 
interfered with her ability to perform her military duties or 
posed a decided health or mission risk to the extent that 
warranted referral to a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) and a 
Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) for possible medical discharge. 

 

Neither of her physicians determined that with proper diet 
control and exercise the applicant could not achieve fitness 
standards. Notwithstanding the post-service medical opinion 
provided, which implies the applicant’s weight and subsequent 
failures may not have been totally within her span of control, 
the Medical Consultant opines the applicant’s commander followed 
established Air Force policies when administering the 
administrative discharge. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant 
on 17 Jan 12 for review and comment within 30 days. 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 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. Therefore, 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 our understanding of the issue 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-2011-02690 in Executive Session on 5 Apr 12, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 


The following documentary evidence for Docket Number BC-2011-
02690 was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 13 Jul 12, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 12 Jan 12. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Jan 12. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Chair