RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05243 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His compensable disability rating of 30 percent from the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) be increased. ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His disability rating should be increased due to secondary injuries to his ankle and back; problems that were brought on due to hip replacement surgery. In 2011, the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) determined that the applicant should receive a compensable disability rating of 10 percent for a right ankle disorder. In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a personal statement and a copy of his DVA Decisional document. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 24 Sep 04, the applicant, a Technical Sergeant (TSgt) with the Air Force Reserve, while serving on Extended Active Duty (EAD) at Ft. Polk, LA, was exiting a military vehicle, stepped on a stone twisting his leg and reinjuring his hip. On 1 Oct 04, a Line of Duty Determination (LOD) found that the applicant’s injury was In the LOD (ILOD). The LOD indicated the applicant had a history of arthritis with a planned hip replacement in Nov and was experiencing more pain with everyday activities. Medical providers recommended the applicant follow- up with his doctor once he returned to Eglin AFB, FL. On 24 Sep 04, the applicant was released from active duty. On 12 Jul 05, a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) was conducted and the applicant was placed on EAD orders. On 6 Feb 06, the applicant was released from active duty with a reason for separation of disability, permanent. On 7 Feb 06, the applicant was relieved from his Air Force Reserve assignment, under the provisions of AFI 36-3212, Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, and Separation. On 8 Feb 06, the applicant was disability retired with a compensable disability rating of 30 percent. He was credited with 18 years, 10 months, and 28 days of service for basic pay, including 10 years, 5 months, and 15 days of active service for retirement. ________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSD 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. Because the applicant was a member of the Air Force Reserve, the records of his evaluation by the PEBs are not contained in Automated Records Management System (ARMS) and thus are not available. As such, the only records available in conducting his review are the dates reflected in the Military Personnel Data system (MilPDS) and the documents provided by the applicant. The sources noted above reflect that the IPEB reviewed the case on 14 Dec 05 and determined that the condition was unfitting for continued military service and recommended permanent retirement with a disability rating of 30 percent for his hip replacement. On 7 Dec 05, the applicant concurred with the IPEB. On 17 Jan 06, Special Order ACD-00348 was issued that established 8 Feb 06 as the retirement date. The documentation provided by the applicant to support the claim for a higher rating is limited to a partial copy of his latest VA rating. The document dated 22 Apr 13, shows that his right ankle was given a 10 percent rating effective 26 Jan 11. In addition, DPSD noted the differences between the Military Disability Evaluation System (MDES) and the DVA DES and how both systems operate under two separate laws and in concert to provide complete disability evaluation of service-connected medical conditions. The complete DPSD evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reiterated his original contentions that the injuries secondary to his hip replacement requires an increase to his initial rating determination because he has additional health issues resulting from the initial hip surgery. He has documented back and ankle pain due to one leg being shorter than the other. He has been prescribed pain medication to include a shoe lift and although this helps he still has severe pain and must limit all activities that include prolong standing or walking. In further support of his appeal, the applicant provides his doctor’s medical notes. The applicant’s complete response, with attachment, 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 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 to include the medical documentation provided in support of his request; however, the applicant’s case has undergone an exhaustive review by the Air Force Office of Primary Responsibility (OPR) and we do not find the evidence presented sufficient to overcome its assessment of the case. In addition, while the applicant asserts that the initial rating decision was made based on his condition at the time and his condition has worsened over time, as noted by the OPR, the Military Disability Evaluation System (MDES) only offers compensation for the medical condition that is the cause for career termination; and then only to the degree of impairment present at the time of final disposition or military separation. Conversely, the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) operates under a separate set of laws which takes into account the fact that a person can acquire physical conditions during military service that, although not unfitting at the time of separation, may later progress in severity and alter the individual's lifestyle and future employability. Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force OPR and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our conclusion 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-2013-05243 in Executive Session on 9 Sep 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 1 Nov 13, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Pertinent Excerpts from Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPFD, dated 24 Dec 13. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Jan 14. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 23 Jan 14, w/atch. Panel Chair