RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02488 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His reentry (RE) code 2Q “Personnel medically retired or 
discharged” be changed so that he can serve in another branch of 
the military. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

A memorandum prepared in May 08 by the Optometry Services Flight 
Commander, states his vision was adequate for military service at 
20/25 vision. 

 

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of the 
8 May 08, Memorandum prepared by the Commander, and a Standard 
Form 600, Chronological Record of Medical Care. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 6 Dec 05, the applicant entered active duty in the Air Force. 

 

He was processed through the disability evaluation system for 
blurred vision due to a macular degenerative scar with macular 
coloboma in the left eye. 

 

On Dec 07 the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) found the 
applicant unfit for continued service and that the condition 
existed prior to service (EPTS) without permanent service 
aggravation, and recommended discharge under other than Chapter 
61, Title 10, United States Code (U.S.C.) (without severance 
benefits). The applicant non-concurred with the IPEB findings 
and requested a formal hearing at the Formal Physical Evaluation 
Board (FPEB), conceding he was unfit for military service but 
contending that his condition either did not exist prior to 
service or was aggravated by military service. 

 

On 14 Apr 08, the FPEB upheld the IPEB recommendation, and the 
applicant appealed to the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel 
Council (SAFPC). 


 

On 23 May 08, SAFPC concurred with the Informal and Formal PEBs. 

On 4 Aug 08, the applicant was honorably discharged without 
severance benefits, after serving 2 years, 7 months, and 29 days 
on active duty. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSD recommends denial. DPSD states the preponderance of 
evidence reflects that no error or injustice occurred during the 
disability process. The applicant’s congenital left eye 
condition, although improved in May 08, places the member at an 
unpredictable risk for rapid deterioration of his vision and 
requires additional routine monitoring by medical professionals 
and specialists. This places an unreasonable requirement on the 
military; reentry into military service is not recommended. 

 

The complete DPSD evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial. DPSOA states the Secretary of the 
Air Force determined the applicant was physically unfit for 
continued military service and directed his discharge. The 
applicant’s RE code 2Q is correct based on his disability 
discharge. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

On 5 Oct 11, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded 
to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days. To date, 
a response has not been received (Exhibit D). 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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. 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 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. 
Therefore, 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 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-2011-02488 in Executive Session on 1 Dec 11, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 11 Jun 11, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSD, dated 3 Aug 11. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 Oct 11. 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair