RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-05714 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be medically discharged. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He should have been medically discharged. He was injured while on active duty and the injury ended his Air Force Reserve career. His current Air Force (AF) Information Management Tool (IMT)) 131, Application for Transfer to the Retired Reserve, should have reflected that he was medically disqualified to perform his duties and that he was not recommended for reenlistment due to his Line of Duty injury. In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of his AF IMT 131, AF IMT 618, Medical Board Report, AF Form 1042, Medical Recommendation for Flying or Special Operational Duty, AF IMT, Statement of Record Data, AF Form 418, Selective Reenlistment Program Consideration, AF Form 348, Line of Duty Determination, and DD Form 261, Report of Investigation Line of Duty and Misconduct Status, with sworn testimony. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: According to documents extracted from the automated records management system (ARMS) the applicant enlisted in the Air Force Reserves on 13 April 1978. On 5 July 2006 he was released from his, then, current assignment and assigned to the HQ ARPC Retired Reserve section and placed on the Retired Reserve List awaiting retirement at age 60 (2 March 2018). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 1. The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial of the applicant's petition to supplant his established reason for separation with a medical retirement. As an overview, the applicant sustained an In Line of Duty (ILOD) injury to his back in 1993 after being struck by a landing-gear door which reportedly slipped from the hands of an officer holding onto the door. Although the applicant's more recent testimony suggests that he reportedly experienced chronic recurring back pain and paresthesias of the bilateral upper and lower extremities, there is also evidence that the applicant did not report any chronic pain or an inability to perform his duties as a result of a medical ailment over a several year period after his initial injury (between 1993 to 2003), as shown through his consistent reports of “good” health on periodic physical assessments. Moreover, the evidence necessary for establishing service connection of his pain of 2003 with the ILOD injury sustained in 1993 is challenged by the report of intervening injuries (cutting down a tree, summer 2001 and automobile accident, January 2003) while not in a duty status. 2. Additionally, the applicant's clinical history, as disclosed by him in 1993 significantly differs from that disclosed in 2003, not only in degree and frequency of pain, but also in location of injury along with new complaints of paresthesias of the bilateral upper and lower extremities. Specifically, the 1993 report indicated that the applicant was “struck in the back at the waist level” and that he was able to resume duties, while the more recent account from the applicant indicates that he was “struck on the neck and back in 1993.” This latter scenario may be intended to establish a possible correlation with the left- sided cervical disc herniation and L5-S1 lumbar disc herniation seen on MRI scans. Nevertheless, the Medical Consultant opines that the mere discovery of the herniated discs (1999 and 2003) and the history of a blunt injury to the back in 1993 (which did not interrupt duty at the time of injury) are not proof that these MRI findings were the direct result of the 1993 injury. Indeed, it is possible to discover herniated discs among an absolutely asymptomatic population. The record is void of any information that explains the applicant's clinical and/or assigned duties between 2003 and the time of his 2006 transfer to the Retired Reserve. The Medical Consultant can only speculate that even though likely still disqualified from flying duties, the applicant was retained performing alternative non- flying duties until completion of his term of enlistment. 3. Addressing the applicant's contention that he was denied re- enlistment and should have been medically discharged, AFI 36- 2606, Reenlistment in the United States Air Force paragraph 3.16.2, states: “Airmen may not re-enlist (RE code 4K) when the AF Form 422, Physical Profile Serial Report, clearly indicates they are unfit for continued service, or when they are pending evaluations by a medical evaluation board (MEB) or physical evaluation board (PEB).” Although the AF Form 618, Medical Board Report, indicates that a Medical Evaluation Board may have indeed been under consideration in September 2005, it is apparent that medical officials concluded the applicant did not warrant a medical hold for processing via military Disability Evaluation System for a service incurred or aggravated injury or illness; by virtue of the absence of such medical and administrative evidence in the applicant's case file, which otherwise only indicates that he was denied re-enlistment and elected to transfer to the Retired Reserve. Additionally, the applicant's record does not show that he would have been otherwise eligible for a medical separation or retirement under 10 U.S.C., §1207a for a medical condition that became disqualifying (or unfitting by a Physical Evaluation Board) while serving a period of 31 days or more; or that he had achieved at least 8 years of active service. 4. The BCMR Medical Consultant concludes that despite the fact that there are back-and-forth changes in opinion with regard to the applicant's LOD determination, the burden of proof has not been sufficiently met to replace the applicant's transfer to the Retired Reserve List with a medical separation or retirement. The complete AFBCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 4 April 2013 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). To date, a response has not been received. ________________________________________________________________ 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 of an error or injustice has been presented regarding the applicant’s request to be granted a medical discharge. 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 BCMR Medical Consultant and adopt the rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant would not have qualified for a medical discharge based upon a preponderance of medical evidence at or about the time of his release from military service. Accordingly, the applicant’s request for a medical discharge is not favorably considered. 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 issue(s) involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. ________________________________________________________________ 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 15 October 2013, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered n AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-05714: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 26 Nov 2012, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, dated 29 Mar 2013. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 4 April 2013