RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-02048 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be changed to a medical discharge. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He broke his back while in the service and believes he is entitled to a medical discharge. In support of the applicant’s appeal, he provides documents extracted from his military personnel record, Congressional documentation, and other documentation. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ _ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant entered active duty on 23 August 2010. An email provided by the applicant from the United States Army National Guard dated 19 March 2013 reflects the following: While at technical school during the applicant’s Initial Active Duty Training on 28 December 2010, an Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) convened and diagnosed the applicant with spondylolisthesis. The IPEB recommended discharge with severance pay – compensable at 20 percent. During this assessment the applicant asserted that he was fit for duty and should be returned to duty. On 24 February 2011, the applicant went through a Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB). The FPEB found the applicant fit and returned him to duty. On 13 May 2011, the applicant requested to see a neurosurgeon. On 7 June 2011, the applicant received a letter from the 188th MDG that he had a potentially disqualifying medical condition and further documentation from his civilian provider was required. On 3 January 2012, the applicant was notified by his commander of his intent to recommend his discharge from the Air National Guard and as a Reserve of the Air Force for failure to comply with requirements for a medical examination. Specifically, he was noncompliant with requested medical information. On 10 October 2012, the applicant submitted a request for a conditional release from the Arkansas Air National Guard to join the United States Army Reserve. On 14 October 2012, the commander approved the applicant’s request. Special Order P-005396 dated 10 April 2013, reflects the applicant was discharged with a general characterization of service from the ANG and as a member of the Reserve of the Air Force effective 28 February 2013. ________________________________________________________________ _ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: NGB/SGPA recommends denial. SGPA states the applicant is not eligible for a medical discharge. The applicant had a medical condition that was found while at technical school. The applicant went through the IPEB and was found unfit. The applicant disagreed with the disposition; appeal of his case went to the FPEB. He was found fit and returned to duty. According to an email submitted, the applicant also had another medical condition. The Medical Group (MDG) requested the documentation for the new condition. The applicant never submitted the requested documentation. After several requests, the 188th began the administrative discharge process. The applicant requested a conditional release instead of being administratively discharged. The 188th agreed to allow the applicant to have a conditional release from the Air National Guard (ANG) to the Army National Guard (ArNG). The applicant had from October 2012 to February 2013 to enlist in the ArNG. Since the applicant never enlisted in the ArNG in the time allotted, an administrative discharge was completed. The SGPA complete evaluation is at Exhibit B. The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial. The AFBCMR Medical Consultant states the medical record is devoid of any medical documentation that would support a medical discharge. On numerous occasions the applicant stated he was “Fit for Duty”. The applicant rejected the IPEB “unfit” recommendation. The FPEB concurred with the applicant and he was returned to duty. In October 2012 the applicant requested a conditional release from the ANG to join the Army NG stating again “I am Fit for Duty”. There exists no evidence to support a medical discharge. The 188th MDG requested medical information on 7 June 2011 and it appears that when discharged on 10 April 2013 he still did not supply the requested material (22 months later). He is sensitive to the applicant’s potential need for continuing medical care. Therefore, the Medical Advisor encourages the applicant to utilize the resources of the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) to the extent that he may be entitled. The DVA is the agency chartered by Congress to provide assistance to all eligible veterans. The Military Disability Evaluation System (MDES) is responsible for maintaining a fit and vital fighting force. While the MDES considers all of the service member’s medical conditions, compensation can only be offered for those medical conditions that cut short a service member’s career, and then only to the degree of severity present at the time of final disposition. However, the DVA, operating under a different set of laws (Title 38, United States Code), is empowered to periodically reevaluate veterans for the purpose of adjusting the disability rating should his degree of impairment vary over time. The discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. The applicant provided no facts warranting a change to his separation code or narrative reason for separation or type of discharge. The AFBCMR Medical Advisor opines the applicant has not met the burden of proof of error or injustice that warrants the desired change of the record. The AFBCMR Medical Consultant’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 11 June 2013, copies of the evaluations were forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days (Exhibit D). 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 timely filed. 3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. We took note of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the NGB/SGPA and the BCMR Medical Consultant and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion no basis exists to grant a medical discharge. Therefore, in view of the above and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend favorable consideration of this request. 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-2013-02048 in Executive Session on 16 January 2014, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 18 April 2013, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Letter, NGB/SGPA, dated 21 May 2013. Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, dated 2 June 2013. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 11 June 2013.