RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02871 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His honorable discharge be changed to a medical separation and he receive medical compensation retroactive as of 6 April 1983. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was not officially discharged from his military obligation. His discharge was not justified. He did not sign his NGB Form 22, Report of Separation and Record of Service. In support of his request, the applicant submits a personal statement, documents extracted from his military personnel records, and medical documentation. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant’s NGB Form 22 reflects he served a total of 15 years 8 months and 7 days of service. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial. The Medical Consultant notes the NGB Form 22 was altered by the applicant with the added word “Medical” and the physician’s caduceus symbol affixed to the document. This is presumably to show the progression of the applicant’s disease in 2007, assuming these are indeed photographs of his leg. To give the Board an overview of how the Air Force views conditions like the applicant’s, AFI 48-123, Medical Examinations and Standards [for Retention], under the subject of vascular conditions, the Consultant notes that “chronic venous insufficiency (post—phlebitic syndrome),” is listed among potentially disqualifying medical conditions, “when symptomatic or requiring elastic support or chronic anticoagulation.” The applicant’s early photographs are suggestive of stasis dermatitis, which likely had its origin in venous insufficiency. The applicant’s later photographs represent a marked progression of the disease entity, as reflected by the large ulcer crater on the left leg and associated lower limb swelling. Also, under AFI 48-123, varicose veins, when they are “severe and symptomatic” may also be disqualifying and may preclude continued military service. However, with respect to the applicant’s eligibility for military disability compensation, even under a presumption that his medical condition was service incurred or aggravated, the photographs alone are insufficient to determine that he should have been placed on Medical Hold for the purpose of conducting a Medical Evaluation Board in 1983; or that he would have been found unfit for continued service by a Physical Evaluation Board, were he not already separating under provision of ANGR 39-10. The applicant has supplied no evidence that his duty performance was considered inadequate at the time of his release from military service, nor is there evidence of inadequate duty performance that was caused by his medical condition. The Medical Consultant is not apprised of whether the applicant has received service connection and compensation by the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) as of this date. He is nevertheless advised that the military Departments, operating under Title, 10, United States Code (U.S.C.), only offers disability compensation for and when a medical condition is the cause for career termination; and only to the degree of impairment present at the “snap shot” time of final military disposition. The presence of a medical condition that was not unfitting while in service, and was not the cause of separation or retirement, that has later progressed in severity causing disability resulting in possible service connected DVA compensation is not a basis to grant retroactively military disability discharge or disability compensation. The Medical Consultant opines the applicant has not met the burden of proof of an error or injustice that warrants the desired change of the record. The Medical Consultant’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant provided documents extracted from his military personnel records and medical documentation. The additional documentation provided 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 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 opinion and recommendation of the AFBCMR Medical Consultant and adopt his rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of proof of the existence 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 the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of an 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-2011-02871 in Executive Session on 8 May 2012, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-02871 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 18 August 2011, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Record. Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, dated 16 December 2011. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 20 December 2011. Exhibit E. Additional Documentation, Applicant.