RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-00136
		INDEX NUMBER:  145.00
	xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx	COUNSEL:  

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  27 JAN 07

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her records be corrected to show she was disability retired and not discharged after completion of required active service.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her medical conditions warranted evaluation by the Air Force Disability Evaluation System.

In support of her request, the applicant submits a copy of her Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) Rating Decision and a copy of her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 22 February 1994, and was progressively promoted to the grade of staff sergeant.  On 14 May 2004, she was discharged after completion of required active service.  She received a reenlistment eligibility code of 3D, “Second-term or career airman who refused to get permanent change of station or permanent tour of duty assignment retainability.”  She served a total of 10 years, 2 months and 21 days active duty service.  On 15 May 2005, the applicant enlisted in the Reserves and currently serves in the grade of staff sergeant.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial and states in part the preponderance of evidence of the records reflect that the applicant continued to perform her military duties in an excellent manner despite her medical conditions and that referral for disability evaluation was not warranted at that time.  She voluntarily separated at the expiration of her obligated term of service and her medical conditions were not the reason she separated.  Her service incurred conditions have been granted service connected disability ratings by the DVA in accordance with Title 38; however, this does not establish a basis for similar action by the Air Force.  Action and disposition in this case are proper and equitable reflecting compliance with Air Force directives that implement the law.

The BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

The applicant states during the last 12 months of active duty service, her neck, mid back, and lower back pain; in addition to her migraine headaches progressively worsened.  She experienced chronic pain throughout her body, which has been diagnosed by the DVA as fibromyalgia.  If her medical problems were evaluated while she was on active duty, she would have been rendered unfit to continue active military service.  During the last six months of service, she should have been given a more thorough medical evaluation.  Given the multitude of medical problems, she should have been placed on medical hold pending separation and her medical records should have been thoroughly evaluated.  However, no one advised her that she could apply for medical retirement at the time.

The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

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 see no evidence, which would lead us to believe that at the time of her separation, she suffered from a physical condition or disability, which prevented her from performing her regular military duties or disqualified her from worldwide service.  Since there were no disqualifying medical conditions at the time of her separation, we see no reason why she would have been eligible for consideration in the disability evaluation system.  Therefore, we agree with the opinions and recommendation of the BCMR Medical Consultant that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  In the absence of persuasive evidence to the contrary, the Board finds no compelling 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 this application in Executive Session on 16 November 2006, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

		Chair
		Member
		Member

The following documentary evidence was considered for AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2005-00136:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 20 Jan 05, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 22 Sep 06.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Sep 06.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 16 Oct 06, w/atchs.

		   
		   Chair