RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01472
	XXXXXXX	COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His compensable disability rating of 20 percent be increased to 
40 percent.  

________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Before contracting Type 1 Diabetes, he was able to do his 
primary duties as an aircraft loadmaster.  Afterward, he was no 
longer able to keep his flying status because it would place 
undue risk upon the crew and mission.  Because he was restricted 
in his duties, he believes his disability rating should be 
changed to 40 percent in accordance with the Veterans Affairs 
Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of his 
Medical Evaluation Board/Review in Lieu of (MEB/RILO) Summary, 
AF Form 469, Duty Limiting Condition Report; Aeromedical 
Summary; Termination of Aviation Service; Commander’s Letter of 
Impact to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) and character 
reference letters for the PEB.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at 
Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 25 Aug 09, the applicant underwent a MEB due to Diabetes 
Mellitus Type 1 and his case was referred to the Informal 
Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB).  The IPEB found the applicant 
unfit for further military service and recommended a compensable 
percentage for disability of 20, with severance pay for Diabetes 
Mellitus Type 1, under VASRD rating code 7913.  The applicant 
appealed this finding to the Formal PEB; however, after 
consulting with counsel, he waived his earlier election to 
demand a formal hearing.  On 16 Mar 10, the Secretary of the Air 
Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) recommended the applicant be 
separated with a compensable percentage for disability of 20 and 
discharged with severance pay.  

On 28 Jul 10, the applicant was discharged from active duty, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-3212, Physical Evaluation for 
Retention, Retirement, and Separation, with a compensable 
disability rating of 20 percent.  He was credited with 3 years, 
9 months, and 26 days of active duty service.

________________________________________________________________

THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPFD recommends denial, stating, in part, that the 
preponderance of evidence reflects that no error or injustice 
occurred during the disability process or at the time of 
separation.  The applicant had no episodes of ketoacidosis or 
hypoglycemic reactions requiring hospitalizations.

In addition, DPFD noted the differences between the Military 
Disability Evaluation System (MDES) and the DVA and how both 
systems operate under two separate laws and in concert provides 
complete disability evaluation of service-connected medical 
conditions.  

The complete DPFD evaluation is at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the 
applicant on 28 Jun 13 for review and comment within 30 days.  
As of this date, no response has been received by this office 
(Exhibit D).

________________________________________________________________

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 took notice 
of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of 
the case; however, the applicant’s case has been reviewed by the 
Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) and we did not 
find the evidence provided sufficient to overcome its assessment 
of the case.  Therefore, we agree with the OPR’s recommendation 
and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our decision 
that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or 
injustice.  In view of the above and in the absence of evidence 
to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the 
relief sought in this application.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material 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-2013-01472 in Executive Session on 30 Jan 14, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 20 Mar 13, w/atchs. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPFD, dated 10 Jun 13.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Jun 13.




                                   Panel Chair