RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01096 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His permanent medical disability retirement be removed and he be reinstated back into the United States Air Force Academy (USAFA) so that he can be commissioned as a second lieutenant in the USAF. ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His medical condition of “Keratoconus” which subsequently led to his medical retirement with a disability rating of 30 percent has been corrected by a hybrid lens and he should be reinstated as a first class cadet at the USAFA. In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a personal statement; copies of his Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) documentation; USAFA disenrollment documents; medical retirement orders, and other supporting documentation. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force and the BCMR Medical Consultant. Subsequent to this request, the applicant has been advised by the USAFA that since the USAFA already has an established process for re-admission, the BCMR process might not be the proper avenue to pursue re-admission at this time. The applicant was further advised that if he believes his vision has been corrected enough to meet admission standards for the USAFA and subsequent commissioning in the USAF, he should contact the nearest Department of Defense Medical Examination Review Board (DoDMERB) office to have his vision tested. If they confirm that he meets their standards, then he should contact the USAFA admissions office for further information about re-admission. ________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSD recommends denial, stating, in part, based on a preponderance of the evidence, no error or injustice occurred during the disability process or at the time of separation. When the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) reviewed the applicant’s case, they noted: “Although you were able to tolerate contact lenses, the Board opines that they are medically required for someone with your condition, and rates your disability accordingly.” The applicant’s commander noted that there were no waivers for his condition. The applicant was medically retired because his eyesight did not meet the requirements to graduate and be commissioned as an officer in the USAF. The complete AFPC/DPSD evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 11 Jun 10 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D). ________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial. He recommends the applicant submit an inquiry to the DoDMERB for an evaluation of his qualification for re-entering military service, as recommended by the Deputy Chief, Cadet Personnel; and if medically cleared or waived for service entry, the applicant should follow up with an application to the USAFA waiver authority. The applicant was retired due to a disqualifying medical condition called “Keratoconus.” It is a degenerative disorder of the eye in which structural changes within the cornea causes it to thin and change to a more conical shape than its normal gradual curve. It can cause substantial distortion of vision, with multiple images, streaking and sensitivity to light. Aside from the fact the applicant evidently passed accessions standards and examinations when he first entered the USAFA, he have since acquired a medical condition that is disqualifying for accession or induction into military service. The applicant is likely correct in the assumption that had he used a product like “SynergEyes” while attending the USAFA, he may not have been subject to an MEB and would have been able to complete his education and possibly commissioning. However, the BCMR Medical Consultant opines that revoking the applicant’s retirement prior to the applicant’s clearance by DoDMERB may be premature and could constitute a disservice to the applicant if he is subsequently denied re-entry with the loss of retirement benefits. He further finds it inappropriate to direct the applicant’s return to the USAFA without him passing the appropriate checks and balances designed to protect the interest of the applicant and the Military Department. The complete BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit E. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF THE ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION A copy of the BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 12 Oct 10 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit F). ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. The applicant has not exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. In this respect, we note, the applicant has been advised by officials at the USAFA that if he believes his vision has been corrected enough to meet admission standards for the USAFA and subsequent commissioning in the USAF, he should contact the nearest Department of Defense Medical Examination Review Board (DoDMERB) office to have his vision tested. If they confirm that he meets their standards, then he should contact the USAFA admissions office for further information about re-admission. 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, 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 conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Additionally, the BCMR Medical Consultant opines that revoking the applicant’s retirement prior to the applicant being cleared by DoDMERB may be premature and could constitute a disservice to the applicant if he is subsequently denied reentry with the loss of retirement benefits. Therefore, 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. 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(s) involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. ________________________________________________________________ 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-2010-01096 in Executive Session on 14 December 2010, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 10 Mar 10, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSD, dated 28 May 10. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Jun 10. Exhibit E. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 6 Oct 10. Exhibit F. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 Oct 10.