AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01257
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
IN THE MATTER OF:
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
1. His Uncharacterized service be changed to Honorable.
2. His narrative reason for separation “Failed Medical/Physical
Procurement Standards” reflect “Discharge from Service-Connected
Injury and Illness during the time in Military Active Duty.”
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
During his time in the service while stationed at Lackland AFB he
received serious injuries from a fall to the ground and from
being struck by a fellow airman’s elbow while getting out of bed.
He has suffered with headaches, dizziness, leg, back, and chest
pain, as well as brain injury.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 29 November
2011 and was discharged on 16 December 2011. He served 18 days
on active duty and received an RE Code of 4C - (Separated for
concealment of juvenile records, minority, failure to meet
physical standards for enlistment, failure to attain a
9.0 reading grade level as measured by the Air Force Reading
Abilities Test, or void enlistments).
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application,
extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in
the letter prepared by the AFBCMR Medical Consultant which is at
Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial. He states the
applicant was involved in a motor vehicle accident in Vietnam in
1988, injuring his back, and hospitalized for three days. No
medical records are available for this encounter - Existed Prior
to Service (EPTS).
The applicant was involved in another motor vehicle accident on
30 November 2010, (12 months prior to his enlistment). He
injured his neck, back, and head; he was seen in the emergency
room at a local hospital and discharged. He followed up with his
private medical provider who states “future recurring problems
should not be ruled out. However, spinal sprain syndrome of this
nature could lead to long-term problems in the future with
increasing osteoarthritis changes. As with all soft tissue
injuries he may experience periodic exacerbative episodes of
painful musculo-skeletal symptoms from time to time, depending on
activity level. During these periods, he may well require future
treatment and should be afforded, including re-evaluation with
the clinic, regular physiotherapy/chiropractic modalities over
the next 2 to 3 years and on demand basis indefinitely….” The
above statements and facts support a condition that existed prior
to service, the applicant knowingly or unknowingly failed to
report this change in physical condition.
The applicant states he fell backward and injured his back and
head on 1 December 2011 (one day after enlistment). He was
evaluated and had x-rays and a MRI of his spine which was
reported as normal without pathology. Also, his physical exams
were all reported as normal.
The applicant was accidently hit in the head by a fellow airman’s
elbow as he was getting out of his bunk bed. On 8 December 2011,
a physical examination at that time was normal.
Regarding the applicant’s injuries during his military service
from 29 November 2011 to 16 December 2011, review of his military
medical records show no exacerbation of symptoms, no evidence of
permanent aggravation of symptoms, and all symptoms are verbatim
to those described by his chiropractor. The applicant’s medical
notes dated 8 December 2011, read: “Head pain is intermittent
and is more annoying than painful and feels better overall.”
It is noted that the applicant was offered legal counsel but
declined. He has not met the burden of proof of an error or
injustice that warrants a change in the record.
The Medical Consultant’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.
2
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant states he was misled by a fraudulent promise by Air
Force personnel. He was promised that he would be trained in a
special course for senior officer leadership (minimum ranking and
payment of a captain) in conjunction with his education,
experience, and background as a Harvard graduate. He further
states, he was involved in several accidents and was
misdiagnosed. He was in good and stabilizing condition before
entering active duty.
The applicant’s complete 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 timely filed.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice that would
warrant a change to his narrative reason. After a thorough
review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s submission,
we are not persuaded that given the circumstances surrounding his
separation from the Air Force, that the narrative reason should
be changed. The applicant contends that he suffered serious
injuries during his military service; however, in this respect,
we note the comments by the AFBCMR Medical Consultant that a
review of his medical records shows no exacerbation of symptoms,
no permanent aggravation of symptoms, and all symptoms are
verbatim to those described by his chiropractor. Therefore, we
are not persuaded that a change to the applicant’s narrative
reason for separation is warranted. We are in complete agreement
with the assessment and recommendation of the AFBCMR Medical
Consultant that the applicant has not met the burden of proof of
an error or injustice that warrants a change in the record. With
regard to his request that his service be characterized as
honorable,
level
separation/uncharacterized
when
separation is initiated in the first 180-days continuous active
service. The Department of Defense (DoD) determined that if a
member served less than 180 days continuous active service, it
would be unfair to the member and the service to characterize
their limited service. Therefore, his uncharacterized character
of service is correct and in accordance with DoD and Air Force
characterization
airman
entry
are
service
given
3
instructions. 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 issues involved.
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2012-01257 in Executive Session on 5 March 2013, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2012-01257 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 1 February 2012, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant,
dated 26 December 2012.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 14 January 2013.
Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, not dated.
4
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-000970
________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He received an honorable discharge with a separation reason of misconduct. The complete Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He contends medications he was taken for health problems adversely affected his job performance. BY DIRECTION OF THE PANEL CHAIR GREGORY...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110024098
He provides: * Standard Form 600 (Chronological Record of Medical Care) * VA Rating Decision, dated 16 October 2009 * VA Rating Decision, dated 24 February 2011 * VA Rating Decision, dated 11 July 2011 * DA Form 199 (PEB Proceedings) * Conner Troop Medical Clinic (CTMC) Notification of Completion of Physical Examination * DD Form 2807-1 (Report of Medical History) (page 3 of 3) * DD Form 2808 (Report of Medical Examination) (page 3 of 3) * DA Form 3947 (MEB Proceedings) * MEB NARSUM * MEB...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00953
The fact that a person has a medical condition does not mean that the condition is unfitting for continued military service. Based on definition, the facts and circumstances involved, the IPEB determined that the applicants medical conditions were not caused by an instrumentality of war or a direct result of armed conflict, but his prior back pain from 2009 was aggravated in the combat zone, but not combat related. His disabilities are classified as combat related, the unfitting...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03093
A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. The AFBCMR Medical Consultant advises that a computed axial scan of the applicant’s head at the time of the accident was normal and an electroencephalogram performed 10 months later was normal, both objective evidence arguing against serious brain trauma or its residuals. The applicant has provided no persuasive evidence that he was denied due process or that the actions taken against him were inappropriate or unsupported by his own...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03102
However, evidence in the medical records show that he reported symptoms of depression in May 1993. The DD Form 261, Report of Investigation, Line of Duty and Misconduct Status, dated 7 May 97, which relates to the motor vehicle accident is incomplete. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that the applicant should be given a medical discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040003121C070208
A doctor at WRAMC, LTC “X,” completed a Form 46-2-R, Military Physician’s Statement, Soldier’s Incapacitation/Fitness for Duty, in which he stated that he examined the applicant on 21 August 2002 and that he was not fit to perform his military duties or his civilian job from 21 August 2002 until 31 January 2003. (1) The applicant was followed up on 9 May 2002. He stated that he had his elbow evaluated by Doctor “C” at WRAMC on 6 November 2001, and was informed that the paperwork...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-00429
He should have been rated for the other injuries (neck and back) that he also sustained in the accident since they were also addressed during his active duty military career. On 18 May 99, the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) found the applicant unfit for further military service due to “status post motor vehicle accident 1994 with residuals, chronic headaches,” and recommended discharge with severance pay with a 10 percent compensable rating. A recommendation by an MEB for...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04111
The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D. ______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The notification memorandum he received from his commander on 22 Mar 2010 was the first time he heard the term "fraudulent entry." Since the possibility exists the applicant did in fact answer the questions honestly, we recommend any and all references in his record pertaining to fraudulent enlistment" or a preexisting condition...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2003-02873
They denied service connection for his low back condition, to include chronic low back pain, the congenital condition of spina bifida occulta, and his degenerative arthritis of the lumbar spine, because the evidence did not show his low back condition was permanently worsened beyond the natural progress of the disease as a result of service. Although the applicant’s back pain rendered him unfit after several months on active duty, evidence of the available records indicates his condition...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-01017
In August 1981 the applicant reported right arm pain, with no history of trauma, and was diagnosed with musculoskeletal pain and was treated with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). On 22 March 1992, the applicant’s exam was recorded as normal and he was re-profiled U1. The presence of medical conditions that were not unfitting while in service, and were not the cause of separation or retirement, that later result in service connected DVA compensation is not a basis...