RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2008-02939
		INDEX CODE:  108.00; 108.03
		COUNSEL: NONE
		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to reflect that:

	1.  He was medically retired.

	2.  He was issued a DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, for his service in OPERATION Desert Storm (1991).

	3.  He was issued a DD Form 214 for his service in OPERATION Noble Eagle (Oct 03 thru Dec 05).

	4.  He be paid per diem for a Temporary Duty (TDY) assignment from 1 Oct 05 thru 12 Dec 05.

	5.  He be granted a Line of Duty determination for left knee injury.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was diagnosed with diabetes while on active duty. He was deemed unfit for active duty service; however, he was not medically retired.  

His orders were cancelled and he received temporary orders for 60 days.  The temporary orders were issued without a fund site and he was not paid per diem from 1 Oct 05 thru 12 Dec 05.  

He was an Information Management Assistant (IMA).  His left knee was injured in the line of duty and he was deemed unfit for military service.  Although he had been diagnosed with diabetes, he was told that the diabetes did not matter.  

In support of the application, the applicant submits an excerpted medical report from his records.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant was issued a Reserve Order dated 2 Dec 99, relieving him of his then current assignment and assigning him to the Retired Reserve Section effective 1 May 99.  He was notified of his eligibility for retired pay in the grade of Technical Sergeant (E-6) upon the age of 60.  

On 2 Sep 02, a request for removal from the Retired Reserve was approved and he was reassigned duties in the Security Forces Squadron.  He received an overall rating of “five” on his Enlisted Performance Report for the period of 24 Sep 02 thru 23 Sep 03 which included laudatory remarks regarding his on and off duty performance, bearing, and volunteerism.  He was subsequently released from active duty status “due to demobilization.”  

On 19 Apr 07, the applicant was released from military service and assigned to the Retired Reserve Section.  He was placed on the Reserve Retired List effective 1 Jun 06 in the grade of Technical Sergeant.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the BCMR Medical Consultant at Exhibit H.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFRC/A1K defers to the appropriate office in regards to the applicant’s request for a medical retirement.  A1K notes a line of duty determination was finalized in Sep 07; however, there is no indication that a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) or a Disability Evaluation System (DES) process was initiated.  In addition, there is no documentation that supports the applicant’s claim he was unfit for military service. 

A1K recommends denial of the applicant’s request to be continued on active duty orders for the period of 22 Dec 05 to 31 May 06.  

A1K states that if the applicant can provide supporting documentation (active duty orders) to reflect his service in OPERATION Desert Storm (1991) and OPERATION Nobel Eagle (Oct 03 thru Dec 05), his DD Form 214 will be corrected to reflect his service during these operations.

The complete A1K evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

HQ AFPC/DPSD recommends denial.  DPSD states the applicant was discharged from the Air Force Reserves on 23 Sep 03 due to Release Due to Demobilization.  DPSD notes the legal office found the informal investigation of the LOD Determination to be legally insufficient as no recommendation was submitted by the investigating officer.  His LOD Determination case was subsequently forwarded for administrative action.

DPSD states the evidence reflects the Physical Disability Division never received a referral to the PEB and, therefore, could not have granted the applicant a medical retirement.

The complete DPSD evaluation is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

Applicant states he was discharged 1 Jun 06.  He had two surgeries to his left knee while he was on active duty orders.  His orders were cancelled prior to his third operation when he was found unfit to remain on active duty.  He questioned why he was not medically discharged and was informed that Individual Mobilization Augmentee’s (IMAs) were processed under a different regulation.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit G.

_________________________________________________________________

BCMR MEDICAL CONSULTANT’S EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial of the applicant’s request for a medical separation/retirement.  

Effective 12 Nov 04, the applicant had 22 years and 14 days of satisfactory service towards retirement.  

On his initial assessment for enlistment into the Air National Guard, his DD Form 93, Report of Medical History, dated 10 Dec 77, reflects he checked “Yes” in the blocks to indicate a positive history of swollen and painful joints, broken bones, and a “trick” or locked knee.  The form also indicates he experienced a fractured left foot in 1971 and a history of meniscectomy and repair of torn ligaments in 1974; both with full range of motion and no complications” on examination.  His left knee injury was recorded as occurring “while in college.”  He received periodic non-flying medical assessments thereafter.  Previous foot and knee injuries are documented on his 12 Jul 81 evaluation as “no loss of motion or strength, well-healed” and “no sequelae,” respectively.  On 8 Jan 82, the applicant signed another AF 93 and circled blocks indicating he had not experienced any significant illness, injury, or hearing loss since his last physical exam/audiogram and was not currently taking any medications.  He was found physically qualified for worldwide duty and retention in the ANG.  In Mar 84, he was seen in the emergency room and orthopedics clinic for pain and ecchymosis of the lower extremity (blood collection visible under the skin).  On 2 Feb 85, he again reported no significant changes since his last exam and was cleared as qualified for duty, although a “3T” profile (temporary restriction to certain duties) was entered into block “P” of the Physical Profile Serial report.  On or about 7 Jan 86, he was found physically qualified for worldwide duty.  On 7 Sep 86, he was seen for left knee pain after “twisting” the knee and falling off the steps at a barracks.  He was diagnosed with a “contusion/sprained left knee.”  On 5 Apr 87, he was seen after immersing his hands into a cleaning solvent; no residual signs of injury or irritation were noted after treatment.  On 2 May 87, he was again found physically qualified for worldwide duty.  On 19 Nov 88, reported to the clinic for the Remedial Weight Control Program.  His weight and height were adjusted upward because he was a weightlifter.  On 4 Feb 93, he checked the block “No” on his SF 93 for problems with a “trick” or locked knee.  His examination demonstrated surgical cars bilaterally with “full range of motion and strength.”  On 14 Jan 90, he was evaluated in follow-up of a cervical spine strain and contusion sustained when the wind reportedly blew a camper shell off the back of a truck striking his head and neck areas.  He was seen on 2 Feb 90, with a complaint of right shoulder pain and numbness of the right arm and hand.  No further work-up duty limitations or referrals appear in the record for the shoulder pain or extremity numbness.  On 23 Jul 93, he was placed on “4T” status (non-worldwide qualified.  On 14 Aug 93, he completed his periodic physical assessment and checked “Yes” on his SF 93 for “trick or locked” knee.  On 29 Sep 93, he returned to worldwide qualified status and on 25 Feb 95, he was again ruled qualified for worldwide duty.  

Although there is evidence the applicant received periodic exacerbations of his left knee ailment, there is no evidence that it precluded the performance of military service for a sufficient duration or level of sustained restriction to duty that would have triggered a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) and further processing through the Military Disability Evaluation System (MDES).  Certain medications, by virtue of the diagnosis alone, could be a trigger for an MEB.  Although there has been a reference to Diabetes mellitus, and possibly asthma, in the applicant’s case, there is no evidence of such a diagnosis or treatment of either condition during his military service.  

The MDES is charged with maintaining a fit and vital fighting force and can only, by law, offer compensation for the medical condition(s) that are the cause of career termination; and then only to the degree of impairment present at the time of separation.  The applicant’s career was not terminated, nor would have been, due to a medical condition based upon the available evidence.  There is no evidence that his medical status sufficiently interfered with his ability to perform military service or that he held sustained duty restrictions at the time of transfer to the Retired Reserve to warrant a Medical Hold and processing for a possible medical separation or retirement.  

The DVA is authorized to offer compensation for any medical condition determined service connected without regard to its demonstrated or proven impact upon a member’s ability to perform military service.  

The complete BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit H. 

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE BCMR MEDICAL CONSULTANT’S EVALUATION:

A copy of the BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 2 Dec 09 for review and comment in 30 days.  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 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 error or injustice regarding the applicant’s requests.  We took notice of his complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we do not find his uncorroborated assertions sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the BCMR Medical Consultant and the Air Force offices of primary responsibility.  We note the applicant’s submission of active duty orders assigning him to tours in support of military operations; however, without travel vouchers we are unable to conclusively determine he actually completed the assignments.  Therefore, we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the aforementioned offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  In the absence of persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.  
_________________________________________________________________

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 this application in Executive Session on 12 Jan 10, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
Member
	Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 5 Aug 08, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFRC/A1K, dated 7 Nov 08.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Dec 08.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSD, dated 21 Aug 09.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Sep 09.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, Applicant, undated, w/atchs.
    Exhibit H.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 1 Dec 09.
    Exhibit I.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 2 Dec 09.

	
	Panel Chair