RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2008-02142
		INDEX CODE:  110.00
		COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to reflect he was discharged for medical reason rather than unsuitability - apathy and defective attitude.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Prior to his discharge, he had signs and symptoms of diabetes (elevated glucose levels); however, his case was not processed through the Military Disability Evaluation System (MDES).

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 19 March 1971.

On 12 August 1975, the applicant was notified by his commander of his intent to recommend his discharge from the Air Force under the provisions of AFM 39-12, paragraph 2-4c.  The specific reasons for this action were the applicant's failure to go on numerous occasions; on 8 February 1975 and 28 March 1975, the applicant did not comply with the bearing and dress regulations; and on 24 July 1975, he was disrespectful in deportment toward a superior non-commissioned officer.

He was advised of his rights in this matter and acknowledged receipt of the notification on that same date.  After consulting with counsel, the applicant waived his right to a hearing before an administrative discharge board and elected not to submit statements in his own behalf.

In a legal review of the case file, the acting staff judge advocate found the case legally sufficient and recommended discharge.  On 18 August 1975, the discharge authority concurred with the recommendations and directed an honorable discharge.  Applicant was discharged on 22 August 1975.  He served 4 years, 5 months, and 24 days on active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial.  The AFBCMR Medical Consultant states the applicant completed a periodic physical examination on 22 May 1975, presumably in preparation for separation, at which time he summarized his previous medical history.  None of the entries entered into the report included signs or symptoms diagnostic of or suggestive of diabetes mellitus.  Additionally, the applicant's visual acuity, when compared to his entrance examination dated 20 January 1971, remained the same - 20/20 left eye and 20/40 right eye.

The applicant received periodic treatment of a number of acute minor illnesses and trauma during his military service.  Although macular scarring, or a retinal pucker (irregular area of kinking of the retina due to retraction of scar tissue) may be seen in diabetes, it may also result from other causes, such as ocular trauma or genetic factors.  Additionally, although diabetics are at a greater risk for lower extremity secondary wound infections, the applicant's previously infected ingrown toenail and an infected laceration of the foot, in an otherwise healthy appearing young adult, may not have resulted in the ordering of a fasting blood glucose or initiation of other diagnostic screening tests for diabetes.  Further, although the applicant was placed on periodic limited duty profiles during his military service, none of these reflected a period of restriction or a level of restriction that would have warranted processing the applicant through the MDES.  In short, none of the applicant's illnesses/injuries encountered during his military service, were the cause for cutting his career short.

Had the applicant been diagnosed with diabetes prior to separation, as he suggests, and his condition was presented before a Physical Evaluation Board, there is no high degree of certainty that he would have been found unfit at the time; particularly if the condition was well controlled with diet and exercise alone, or with only an oral hypoglycemic.  Following this hypothetical line of thinking, noting that the applicant would have concurrently faced an involuntary discharge, the final disposition of his case would have been determined via a "dual action" review by the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council.  Had such a review been undertaken, noting the lack of a causal or mitigating relationship between the administrative violations and diabetes, the Medical Consultant is of the opinion that, more likely than not, the applicant's approved involuntary separation would have been executed.  Finally, although the Department of Veterans Affairs has granted the applicant a pension (rated at 100% as a housebound benefit) for his diabetes, this same agency has failed to identify a service connection for the condition, citing an absence of evidence of record of the disorder during the applicant's military service.

The complete AFBCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 12 September 2008, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D).  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 an error or injustice that would warrant changing the applicant's reason for separation.  The applicant's contentions are duly noted; however, sufficient evidence has not been provided to show that, at the time of his separation, he suffered from a medical condition rendering him eligible for consideration in the disability evaluation system.  In the absence of such evidence, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the requested relief.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of an error or an 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 this application in Executive Session on 6 January 2009, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

			Chair
			Member
			Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2008-02142 was considered:

  Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 May 2008.
  Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
  Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, 
             dated 11 September 2008.
  Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 September 2008.

				
				Chair