RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05830 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His separation from the Air Force on 17 November 1999 be changed to a medical retirement with full military disability benefits. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His discharge was not processed in accordance with AFI 36-3212, Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, and Separation. He did not receive any assistance from a Physical Evaluation Board Liaison Officer (PEBLO). Additionally, the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) disability rating of 40 percent is the only disability rating he has received. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 1 March 1985. On 30 April 1988, the applicant was released from active duty, with an honorable characterization of service, a narrative reason of “Strength Reduction-First Term Airman-Voluntary,” a reentry code of 1J, and was transferred to the Air Force Reserve. Reserve Order A-022, dated 2 November 1999, relieved the applicant from his then, current, assignment and discharged him, effective 17 November 1999, under the authority of AFI 36-3209, Physical Disqualification, with an honorable characterization of service. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandums prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPRs), which are attached at Exhibit C and D. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPFD recommends denial. DPFD states that the preponderance of evidence reflects that no error or injustice occurred during the disability process. On 3 August 1999, the Reserve Fitness Review Panel found the applicant medically disqualified for continued military service for low back pain. His case was referred to the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) at Randolph AFB, Texas, for an unfitness/fitness determination only (condition is not duty related and therefore member is not eligible for compensation under Title 10 USC, Chapter 61). On 26 August 1999, the IPEB found the applicant unfit for military duty. There was no medical evaluation board (MEB) report submitted to the IPEB that could have resulted in a medical separation or retirement. In accordance with Department of Defense Directive (DoDD) 1332.18, dated 4 November 1996, any member of the Ready Reserve who is pending separation for non-duty related impairment shall be afforded the opportunity to enter the disability evaluation system (DES) solely for a determination of fitness. Further, if they disagree with the IPEB determination, they may appear before the Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB) at their own expense. Based on the documents submitted, it does not appear that the applicant exercised his appeal rights. Additionally, there was no “in-line of duty” determination made that would have afforded the applicant the right for a full MEB. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPFD evaluation is at Exhibit C. The AFBCMR IMA Medical Consultant recommends denial. The medical consultant states that to determine whether an error or injustice has occurred, there must be sufficient medical evidence upon which to support the recommendation for relief or sustaining of the prior determination. When a prior determination is being appealed, the burden of proof lies with the applicant to supply supporting medical evidence of a service incurred/service aggravated medical or mental health condition, which also rendered the applicant unfit for continued military service. Thus, the medical consultant concludes that there is insufficient medical and/or administrative documentation to identify an error or injustice regarding the denial of medical retirement for the applicant’s unfitting low back pain. Of particular note, the medical consultant has identified several entries in administrative documents which indicate that the lower back pain was not determined to be service incurred/aggravated (not duty related) though being identified as an unfitting condition. The medical consultant acknowledges the assignment of service connection by the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) although no rationale was provided regarding the diagnosis or basis for service-connection, e.g., an injury during a prior period of service. The military service disability systems, operating under Title 10, and the DVA disability system, operating under Title 38, are complementary systems not intended to be duplicative. In addition, Title 38, USC, authorizes the DVA to increase or decrease the compensation ratings based upon the individual's condition at the time of future evaluations. A complete copy of the AFBCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In further support of his request, the applicant submits a personal statement with attached medical records from his family physician and local neurosurgical clinic and states that the medical records show the condition of his lower lumbar at the time of his 1999 administrative discharge from the Air Force. Additionally, he reiterates his contentions and states that the medical records from the military personnel record archives should contain his line of duty determination that was generated by his former unit’s medical squadron. The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit F. 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 took notice of the applicant’s complete submission, to include his rebuttal, in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) and the AFBCMR IMA Medical Consultant and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief. 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 this application in Executive Session on 6 January 2015, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-05830 was considered: Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 18 Dec 2013, w/atchs. Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPFD, dated 27 Feb 2014. Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR IMA Medical Consultant, dated 17 Sep 2014. Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Sep 2014. Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, not dated, w/atchs.