RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:	BC-2008-02387 INDEX CODE:	108.00
xxxxxxxxxxxxx	COUNSEL:	NONE HEARING DESIRED:	YES

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be reinstated into the Air Force.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His medical condition has been stable. He believes the Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) acted swiftly in retiring him after nearly
19 years of service. Since his retirement, he has changed medications and is no longer affected by working in hot weather conditions.

In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of AF Form 356, Findings and Recommended Disposition of USAF Physical Evaluation Board, his civilian nephrologist diagnosis and other associated documents pertaining to his disability retirement.

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 11 Apr 89, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force and was progressively promoted to the grade of technical sergeant having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 1 Aug 05.

The MEB narrative summary, dated 3 Aug 07 concluded the applicant's polycystic kidney disease and monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance was incompatible with continued active duty service and recommended his case be referred to the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB). A commander's letter, required as part of the disability evaluation, dated 3 Aug 07, indicated the applicant's medical condition had been ongoing for many years, with progressively declining health. His medical condition necessitated multiple medical appointments, increased duty restrictions, and limited assignments.

On 18 Sep 07, the IPEB found the applicant unfit for continued military  duty  and  recommended  permanent  retirement  with  a

compensable disability rating of 60 percent. On 25 Sep 07, the applicant concurred with the recommended findings of the IPEB.

On 30 Oct 07, the applicant's request to be retained on active duty in Limited Assignment Status was disapproved.

Effective 17 Nov 07, he was retired in the grade of technical sergeant with a disability rating of 60 percent. He served 18 years, 7 months and 6 days on active duty.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial. The BCMR Medical Consultant acknowledges the applicant may be able to perform limited duties while in a safe garrison environment and notes his proximity to achieving a 20-year length-of-service retirement eligibility. However, the mission of the Air Force goes beyond a service member's home station duties and calls upon all service members, regardless of rank, service component, or career field, to support the broader Air and Space Expeditionary Force. Therefore, although a civilian nephrologist found no reason to prohibit returning the applicant to his normal duties, the BCMR Medical Consultant opines his medical condition would continue to prohibit his utilization as a Total Force asset. Although the applicant contends a change in medical regimen has removed the risks of performing under "hot weather conditions," the Medical Consultant opines he would be independently vulnerable for further kidney insult should he experience any major soft tissue trauma (with resultant rhabdomyolsis and release of myoglobin into the circulation), as may occur under operational conditions or in training for war.

The complete BCMR Medical Consultant's evaluation is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 28 Apr 09 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 timely filed.
1.	
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. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling 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 Docket Number BC- 2008-02387 in Executive Session on 3 Jun 09, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

Chair 
Member
Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 18 Jun 08, w/atchs. Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C.	Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 23 Apr 09. Exhibit D.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Apr 09.