RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02670 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her narrative reason for separation be changed to medical/service connected disability. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She should have been medically discharged. She is going back to school and cannot receive her educational benefits unless her records are corrected to reflect her medical discharge. The applicant also contends that she did not receive the NGB Form 438, Honorable Discharge Certificate, as stated in her records. However, that form was submitted with her supporting documentation. In support of her appeal, the applicant provides a personal statement, NGB Form 438, NGB Form 22, Report of Separation and Record of Service, Special Order AA-467, Medical Separation Memo and excerpts from her medical records. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant enlisted in the Air National Guard on 14 April 1973. On 7 December 1980, she was diagnosed with pigment depositein characteristics with retinitis pigmentosa. According to the narrative summary, she was told in 1968 or 1970 that she had retinitis pigmentosa by her eye doctor. Additionally, she has complained of night blindness since childhood. On 21 December 1980, she was medically disqualified for continued service. On 1 September 1981, pursuant to Special Order, AA- 467, the applicant was relieved from her assignment and honorably discharged. Her narrative reason for separation was listed as ANGR 39-10 and her separation (SPD) code was JFT (discharge no Board entitlement). ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial. The limited medical evidence shows the applicant experienced some difficulty with near and far vision. However, the record reflects her vision is correctable to 20/20, or thereabout. An eye evaluation dated 4 March 1980, showed the applicant had ring scotoma of the visual fields that were consistent with retinitis pigmentosa. An evaluation of dark adaptation indicated the applicant does not dark adapt. She underwent a separation physical with documented positive findings of pigment deposits characteristics with retinitis pigmentosa in both eyes. Additionally, she also stated she has complained of night blindness since childhood. Under AFI 48-123, Medical Examinations and Standards, any disease, injury, infection process or sequelae involving the eye that is resistant to treatment and or results; or night blindness of such a degree the member requires assistance traveling at night, is disqualifying. There is no evidence the applicant appealed for retention as her right to do so. However, the discharge authority would have retained the right to separate the applicant even if returned to duty by a Physical Evaluation Board for reasons of inability to support the deployed mission or lack of availability for non-deployable positions, among other reasons. The applicant is correct in her assertion that she was released due to a medical condition. However, since the medical condition existed prior to service and was not permanently aggravated by military service, the applicant did not qualify for processing through the military disability evaluation system for medical separation or retirement. She was processed through the involuntary administrative discharge procedures for a disqualifying non-duty related medical condition. The applicant had also not attained at least 8 years of active military service, upon which, her medical condition would have been determined service-incurred. The BCMR Medical Consultant’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit B. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 8 March 2012, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit C). 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. We carefully considered the available evidence of record; however, we found no indication the actions taken to affect the applicant’s discharge was improper or contrary to the provisions of the governing instructions. Therefore 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. Therefore, 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 issues 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 BCMR Docket Number BC-2011-02670 in Executive Session on 17 April 2012, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to BCMR Docket Number BC-2011-02670 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dtd 14 Jul 11, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dtd 20 Dec 11. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dtd 8 Mar 12. Panel Chair