RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03709
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His discharge be upgraded to honorable or he be granted a medical
retirement.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANTS CONTENDS THAT:
He was not treated for lower back pain, sleep apnea and
depression.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 10 Jan 06, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force.
On 8 Jul 11, a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) referred the
applicants case to an Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB)
for Obstructive Sleep Apnea.
On 19 Dec 11, the IPEB determined the applicants medical
condition did not prevent him from reasonably performing the
duties of his office, grade, rank or rating. The IPEB found him
fit and recommended he be returned to duty.
On 18 Jan 12, he tested positive for marijuana.
On 12 Mar 12, his commander preferred two charges against him in
violation of Articles 112a and 131 of the Uniform Code of
Military Justice (UCMJ). Specifically, he was charged with one
specification of wrongful use of marijuana and one specification
of perjury.
On 20 Mar 12, the applicant concurred with the findings and
recommendations of the IPEB. On 22 Mar 12, the Secretary of the
Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) directed the applicant be
returned to duty.
On 30 Mar 12, the applicant requested he be discharged from
service in accordance with Air Force Instruction 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, Chapter 4, in lieu of trial
by court-martial.
On 9 Apr 12, the applicants request for discharge in lieu of
trial by court-martial was recommended for approval by his
commander. His commander indicated the applicant would be issued
an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge. On
12 Apr 12, the Staff Judge Advocate concurred with the
commanders recommendation and characterization of discharge.
On 23 Apr 12, the discharge authority approved the recommended
discharge without offer of probation and rehabilitation. On
2 May 12, the applicant was discharged in lieu of trial by court-
martial. He served 6 years and 14 days on active duty. He had
98 days of lost time due to confinement.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial. DPSOR states that based on the
documentation on file in the master personnel record, the
discharge to include the characterization of service was
consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of
the discharge instruction and was within the discretion of the
discharge authority. In addition, the applicant did not submit
any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred
in the discharge process.
The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C.
The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial. The Medical
Consultant states that he found no medical evidence to support
the applicants medical conditions are directly or indirectly
related to his use of illegal medications, fraudulent testimony
or were the cause for his career termination.
The complete Medical Consultants evaluation is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the
applicant on 19 Feb 13, for review and comment within 30 days.
As of this date, this office has received no response
(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 error or injustice. We took notice
of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of
the case; however, the applicants case has undergone an
exhaustive review by the BCMR Medical Consultant and we did not
find the evidence provided sufficient to overcome his assessment
of the case. Therefore, we agree with the opinions and
recommendations of the Air Force office of primary responsibility
and the BCMR Medical Consultant and adopt their rationale as the
basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain
his burden that he has suffered either an error or an injustice.
In view of the above and 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 the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2012-03709 in Executive Session on 30 May 13, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC-
2012-03709:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 Aug 12, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicants Military Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSOR, dated 25 Sep 12.
Exhibit D. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 15 Feb 13.
Exhibit E. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 19 Feb 13.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02259
The complete DPSD evaluation is at Exhibit C. The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends the administrative adjustment of the applicant's AF Form 356, Findings and Recommended Disposition of the USAF Physical Evaluation Board, to reflect his thyroid condition was considered by the IPEB, but with denial of its inclusion as an unfitting condition in the military disability rating computation; neither initially or at the time of his removal from the TDRL. The complete BCMR Medical Consultants...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 04038
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force at Exhibits C and D. Accordingly, there is no need to recite these facts in this Record of Proceedings. The member had a medical evaluation board on 20 Nov 2008, for atrial fibrillation. The Medical Consultant states that it could not be established that the applicant was unable to reasonably perform his military duties as a result of OSA.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-04038
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force at Exhibits C and D. Accordingly, there is no need to recite these facts in this Record of Proceedings. The member had a medical evaluation board on 20 Nov 2008, for atrial fibrillation. The Medical Consultant states that it could not be established that the applicant was unable to reasonably perform his military duties as a result of OSA.
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-00001
He be retired for length of service with an effective date of 15 Feb 99 versus receiving a permanent disability retirement. He would have continued in the Air Force had it not been for receiving a medical retirement. The DPSOR complete advisory is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In a five page rebuttal, the applicants counsel states the USAF Physical Disability Divisions advisory opinion is not accurate.
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 | CY2013 | BC 2012 05571
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility, which are attached at Exhibits C and E. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial of the applicants request to change the reason for his separation. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C. The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial indicating...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00120
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00120 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her involuntary discharge (under honorable conditions) for personality disorder be changed to a medical separation for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The Medical Consultant states that while the evidence is not supportive of a medical...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01156
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPANM recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice that warrants changing the applicants administrative discharge to a medical discharge. The MTF Commander may submit a waiver request detailing why an MEB should be conducted at his/her own...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-02621
The summary indicates the applicant denied all prior history of sleepwalking/frequent trouble sleeping on his entrance physical exam dated 29 Dec 00; however, he stated “sleepwalking has not been an issue since age 16.” The Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) found his conditions Existed Prior To Service (EPTS) and referred him to an Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB). The Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council directed the applicant be separated from active service for physical...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 02683 1
________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He should not have been discharged from active duty with unresolved medical issues and a Line of Duty (LOD) determination should have been initiated prior to his release from active duty. Although the applicant stated he received treatment for his medical conditions while he was on active orders, he has only provided subjective evidence following his release from active duty. If the applicant was...