RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00804 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to show he was retired for disability rather than discharged. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He should have been awarded a disability rating to qualify for retirement instead of being discharged. His medical conditions were caused/aggravated by his military service. He had no issues for over 14 years until pre-deployment vaccinations were administered while attending basic military training and several training/pre-deployment exercises. This is evidenced by the fact that the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) has resolved doubt in his favor and issued him a disability rating for these conditions. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 21 Nov 06 and served on active duty until 28 Dec 12, when he was discharged for Disability that Existed Prior to Service (EPTS). He was credited with six years, one month, and eight days of total active service. According to the documentation submitted by the applicant, on 28 Mar 13, the DVA issued him the following service connected disability ratings: a. Seizure disorder – 40 percent. b. Intermittent right tinnitus – 10 percent c. Retention cysts, left maxillary sinus – 10 percent. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandums prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility, which are attached at Exhibits C and D. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPFD recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. Under Title 10, United States Code, Physical Evaluation Boards must determine if a member’s condition renders them unfit for continued military service relating to their office, grade, rank, or rating. The fact that a person may have a medical condition does not mean that the condition is necessarily unfitting for continued military service. Further, it must be noted the USAF disability boards must rate disabilities based on the member’s condition at the time of evaluation; in essence a snapshot of their condition at the time. Under Title 38, the DVA may rate any service- connected condition based upon future employability or reevaluate based on changes in the severity of a condition. The applicant submitted documents from the DVA that they reversed their decision on the seizures being EPTS. However, from the applicant’s medical board narrative, it was noted that his seizures began when he was 17 years of age. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPFD evaluation is at Exhibit C. BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial of the applicant’s petition to change his status from “Discharged to retired for medical reasons,” indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. The applicant’s clinical history reflects that he experienced seizures before entering military service; and that the seizure(s) he experienced after entering military service were “similar to what happened” when he was a teenager. Absent a de novo cause of the applicant’s seizures since entering military service, e.g., head trauma, neoplastic disease, stroke, residuals of an post-inflammatory process, or other scientifically proven service-related cause, the Medical Consultant concurs with the conclusions reached by the Military Department Medical Evaluation Board and the Informal Physical Evaluation Board. The fact that the applicant did not disclose a history of seizures at the time he completed his enlistment health documents, which he has disclosed years later, borders on fraudulent service entry; and, as a minimum, would require a waiver to enter military service, in which case the government would not have been obligated to process as a compensable disorder once it precluded retention. A complete copy of the BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 27 Oct 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). 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 an 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 (OPR) and the BCMR Medical Consultant and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion 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 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-2014-00804 in Executive Session on 18 Dec 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-00804 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 28 Mar 13, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPFD, dated 13 Mar 14. Exhibit D. Memorandum, AFBCMR, Medical Consultant, dated 25 Sep 14. Exhibit E. Letter SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Oct 14.