RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00276 INDEX NUMBER: 145.00 COUNSEL: XXX HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: It appears the applicant is requesting his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be corrected to reflect that he was medically discharged; however the applicant’s request is unclear. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He provided his military medical records from 1988 to 1991, to include time stationed at Nellis Air Force to the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA). He was medically disqualified from worldwide duty; however, his records do not state a reason, but it happened. Today, he is permanently disabled and has been denied treatment at the DVA for years. In support of his appeal, the applicant submits copies of his DD Form 214, Honorable Discharge Certificate, and medical documentation. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant completed his initial active duty training (IADT) from 14 April 1986 to 16 July 1986. He was relieved from his Reserve assignment and honorably discharged under the provisions of AFR 35-41, Volume III, Separation Procedures for US Air Force Reserve Members, (medical disqualification), effective 1 July 1991. His discharge orders reflect his reenlistment eligibility as “eligible with waiver.” _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: AFRC/SGP provides no recommendation. SGP states the applicant was medically disqualified for service due to Pancreatitis requiring maintenance of a special restricted fat free diet. His condition was deemed incompatible with service in the Reserves. There is no indication the condition was service connected; therefore, the applicant was not afforded the opportunity to process through the disability evaluation system (DES). The applicant’s contention with the DVA likely results from the fact there is no evidence of a service connection. The complete SGP evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFRC/A1K provides no recommendation. A1K states the DD Form 214 correctly documents the applicant’s active duty service. The applicant was an Air Reserve Component member, which upon his separation from the Air Force Reserve on 1 July 1991, did not meet any of the conditions that would require the completion of a DD Form 214. The military records provided by the applicant indicate he performed active duty service for the purpose of basic training and security specialist technical school for the period 14 April through 16 July 1986. The complete A1K evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: On 6 August 2010, copies of the Air Force evaluations were sent to the applicant for review and comment. As of this date, this office has received no response (Exhibit E). _________________________________________________________________ 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 note that the DD Form 149 submitted by the applicant is unclear on the type of correction he seeks from the Board so there is no basis to consider this request. While ARPC has provided advisories in support of the applicant’s request, they too, conclude that the applicant’s request is unclear. As such, the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of proof that he has been the victim of an error or injustice. If the applicant resubmits his application with a specific request, the Board would be willing to reconsider his application. In view of the above, 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-00276 in Executive Session on 19 October 2010, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 18 Jan 10, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Record. Exhibit C. Letter, AFRC/SGP, dated 19 Jul 10. Exhibit D. Letter, AFRC/A1K, dated 22 Jul 10 Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Aug 10.