RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 				DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02765

 						COUNSEL:   

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO 



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

She be reinstated in the Air Force Reserve (AFR).	


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her counsel failed to present crucial documents for 
consideration of her case which resulted in her discharge.  

She provides a letter dated 14 Apr 14 from the Deputy Chief, Air 
Force Office of Airmen’s Counsel which states he misunderstood 
the status of the applicant’s case when he spoke to her during 
the Sep/Oct 13 timeframe because their tracking system did not 
reflect an administrative Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) on 
file. If he knew she had agreed to an unfit finding believing 
she had to appear before the Formal PEB (FPEB) in person, it 
would have been very easy for her to withdraw her acceptance and 
request a hearing before the FPEB by telephone, which the board 
President routinely approves.  He hopes she will be allowed to 
present her case to the FPEB.  

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 30 Oct 03, the applicant initially entered the AFR.  

On 10 Apr 14, she was discharged from the AFR under honorable 
conditions for physical disqualification in the grade of Staff 
Sergeant (SSgt, E-5).  


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFRC/A1K recommends the case be reviewed by the AFPC Disability 
office to determine whether or not the applicant’s claims 
warrant convening a FPEB.  

In regards to the applicant’s administrative discharge from the 
AFR, all discharge actions were accomplished in compliance with 
AFI 36-3209, Separation and Retirement Procedures for Air 
National Guard and Air Force Reserve Members, paragraph 3.14, 
Physical Disqualification.  The applicant was notified of her 
rights to an IPEB and FPEB.  She waived her right to a FPEB and 
acknowledged receipt of the formal notification of the 
administrative discharge action.   

A complete copy of the A1K evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPFD recommends denial of the applicant’s request.  The 
preponderance of the evidence reflects that no error or 
injustice occurred during the disability process or at time of 
separation.

A medical disqualification case on the applicant was forwarded 
to the IPEB in Jul 13 for review and recommendation.  The IPEB 
reviewed the case file and found the service member unfit for 
continued military service for the medical diagnosis of chronic 
back pain, lumbosacral strain.  She was briefed on the IPEB 
findings and on 28 Oct 13, she declined her right to a formal 
board hearing.  She was subsequently discharged from the AFR on 
10 Apr 14 under honorable conditions.

In a 14 Apr 14 letter, signed by the counsel who was consulting 
the applicant during the disability evaluation process, he 
contends she made the decision to concur with the IPEB 
recommendation based on misunderstandings and assumptions made 
by him and possibly the applicant during the process.  However, 
the AFRC/A1K evaluation states she was notified of her rights to 
an IPEB and FPEB but declined her rights to the FPEB.  She had 
ample time to consult with her legal counsel and request a 
formal board hearing prior to her discharge.

A complete copy of the DPFD evaluation is at Exhibit D.

The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial. The Medical 
Consultant found no basis in medical evidence that warrants 
granting the applicant’s request, other than her counsel’s plea 
that she accepted the unfit finding of the IPEB based upon 
misunderstandings and assumptions during the process.  Moreover, 
the applicant has not presented evidence that she should have 
been found fit and returned to duty.  

The applicant is advised that under DODI 1332.38, Physical 
Disability Evaluation, paragraph 4, subparagraph 4.2, “Members 
of the Reserve components who are not on a call to active duty 
of more than 30 days and who are medically disqualified for 
impairments unrelated to the member’s military status and 
performance of duty shall be referred into the Disability 
Evaluation System (DES) solely for a fitness determination upon 
the request of the member or when directed by the Secretary 
concerned.”  Therefore, since the applicant was found unfit by 
the IPEB, her next recourse would have been to appeal to the 
FPEB for being retained and returned to duty fit. The FPEB would 
not have been charged with attempting to overturn the 
designation that her medical condition was non-service related 
but would have been limited to determining her fitness only.   

A complete copy of the BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is 
at Exhibit E.  


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the 
applicant on 17 Feb 15 for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit F).  As of this date, no response has been received by 
this office.


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.  After careful 
consideration of applicant's request and the available evidence 
of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice 
to warrant corrective action.  Therefore, we agree with the 
opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary 
responsibility and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis 
for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain her 
burden of proof of either an error or an injustice.  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-2014-02765 in Executive Session on 10 Jun 15 under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	 , Panel Chair
	 , Member
	 , Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 1 May 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFRC/A1K, dated 15 Dec 14.
	Exhibit D.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPFD, dated 24 Dec 14.
	Exhibit E.  Memorandum, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, dated 
4 Feb 15.  
	Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Feb 15.