AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE MATTER OF:
DOCKET NO: 97-01280
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
2 2 ))&)
It appears the applicant is requesting that he be permitted to
appear before a Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB).
Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A.
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request
and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the
application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinion was
forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D).
As of this date, no response has been received by this office.
After careful consideration of applicant's request and the
available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of
error or injustice to warrant corrective action. The facts and
opinions stated in the advisory opinion appear to be based on the
evidence of record and have not been rebutted by applicant.
Absent persuasive evidence applicant was denied rights to which
entitled, appropriate regulations were not followed, or
appropriate standards were not applied, we find no basis to
disturb the existing record.
Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.
The Board staff is directed to inform applicant of this decision.
Applicant should also be informed that this decision is final and
will only be reconsidered upon the presentation of new relevant
evidence which was not reasonably available at the time the
application was filed.
Members of the Board
and Mr. Kenneth L.
30 September 1997 in
Instruction 36-2603,
Mr. Wayne R. Gracie, Mr. Michael P. Higgins,
Reinertson considered this application on
accordance with the provisions of Air Force
and the governing statute, 10, U.S.C. 1552.
Panel Chairman
Exhibits:
A. Applicant's DD Form 149
B. Available Master Personnel Records
C. Advisory Opinion
D. SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion
DEPARTMEhT OF THE AIR FORCE
HEADQUARTERS AIR FORCE PERSONNEL CENTER
RANDOLPH .a FORCE BASE, TEXAS
9 Jun 97
MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR
FROM:
HQ AFPC/DPPD
550 C Street West Ste 06
Randolph AFB TX 78 150-4708
SUBJECT: Application for Correction of Military Record
-TION:
"Medical Evaluation Board".
Applicant requests that he be allowed to go before the
FACTS: Applicant was placed on the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) on
4 Jul95 with a diagnosis of Ulcerative Colitis after serving twelve years, eleven months, and two
days of active duty. Member completed his first periodic physical evaluation on 27 Nov 96.
Upon review of the results, the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) recommended that
applicant be discharged with severance pay with a 10 percent compensable disability. IPEB
recommendation was forwarded to member and he concurred with the results on 24 Mar 97.
Separation action was initiated on 7 Apr 97 and discharge was effective 28 Apr 97.
D1SC:USSION: Upon review of the BCMR case, we believe that the member appears to
be requesting that he now be able to appear before the Formal PEB at Lackland AFB, Texas and
not the "Medical Evaluation Board (MEB)" as stated in hisrequest. The decision to conduct an
MEB is made by the medical treatment facility providing care to the member at the time the
member is found to be unfit for military service. Once a disability case has been finalized by the
Office of the Secretary of the Air Force, there are no provisions to reopen that case. The
member's only choice fiom that point is to apply for a board of correction of military record.
Applicant contends that he was not fully informed of the consequences of accepting a
discharge with severance pay. A "Discharge with Severance Pay" fact sheet was forwarded to
the member at the time he was provided the results of the IPEB recommendation. The fact sheet
clearly states that upon discharge, his military benefits will be terminated. It also offers the
member the opportunity to request a FPEB or submit a written rebuttal. Member elected neither
option and concurred with the recommendation of the IPEB.
In reference to applicant's remarks "There is no mention of the fact that I could not
receive any financial disability compensation from the Veterans Administration. I was informed
of this only after contacting the Veterans Administration." is irrelevant to military disability
processing. Of note, however, is the fact that the applicant received a letter fiom AFPCDPPD,
dated 7 Apr 97, notifying the applicant, "If you are currently receiting Veterans Administration
(VA) disability compensation, you should notify the VA of this action immediately and provide
them a copy of your discharge special order. Failure to make this notification may result in over-
payment by the VA, creating a debt against the government which you would be obligated to
repay."
After a thorough of the AFBCMR case file, we find there is no irregularity that would
merit a change to the record
PECOMMENDATION: We recommend denial of the applicant's request. The applicant
has not submitted any material or documentation to show that he w a s inappropriately rated or
that he was inappropriately separated by reason of physical disability. The applicant was
afforded and exercised all rights afforded him by disability law and policy.
DORIS L. ROMERO, DAFC, GS-11
Chief, Disability Operations Branch
Physical Disability Division
Directorate of Pers Prog Management
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). Applicant's response to the advisory opinions is at Exhibit E. After careful consideration of applicant's request and the available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant corrective action. On 6 Dec 96, officials within the Office of the Secretary of the Air Force directed that the...
and Exhibit 1, provides the member be rated for each disability and disabling condition. In regard to the applicant's contention that the Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB) did not consider additional medical addendum and tests scheduled prior to the 24 July 1996 Board, it appears that even though the electrocochleography (ECOG) was not considered by the FPEB, they did consider the applicant's symptoms of chronic disequilibrium and found it not unfitting and, therefore, not ratable or...
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to-the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). REQUESTED ACTION: Applicant was discharged from the Air Force under provisions of AFI 36-3212 with a medical disability and severance pay on 22 Jun 96 after serving a total of 14 years, 4 months, 23 days on active duty. Based on the medical evidence provided to the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB), member was found d i t...
The appropriate Air Force off ices evaluated applicant s request+ and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the, application be denied (Exhibit .C) . The advisory opinions were forwarded to the applicant and counsel for review and response (Exhibit D). RECOMMENDATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant is of the opinion that no change in the records is warranted and the application shpuld be denied.
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). Applicant did not provide a rebuttal by the suspense date and subsequently officials in the Office of the Secretary of the Air Force approved the findings of the previous two boards and directed the applicant’s discharge with severance pay and a 10 percent disability rating. This code was correct at the time of his discharge.
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). On 19 Aug 69, the member was provided a memorandum which included a copy of the medical evaluation and an AF Form 356, Findings and Recommended Disposition of USAF Physical Evaluation Board. On 21 Aug 69, member concurred with the IPEB's findings and subsequently, officials within the Office of the Secretary of the Air Force...
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant reviewed this application and indicated that the applicant developed a bipolar disorder during the course of her active duty service, a condition which had not 2 AFBCMR 97- 01142 J been diagnosed prior to her service (as suggested by the IPEB) nor which was aggravated by "willful noncompliance" as the FPEB found. The Medical Consultant is of the opinion that the applicant should receive relief from the disability evaluation system and have...
The AFPC disability office established a 10 Jan 97 separation date after authorizing 20 days processing time and 10 days PTDY and notified the Military Personnel Flight on 12 Dec 96. The leave history shows 5 days leave 16 - 20 Dec 96,20 days PTDY 21 Dec 96 - 9 Jan 97, and a negative leave balance of minus 11.5 days. FACTS: Applicant was involuntarily separated fiom the Air Force on 10 Jan 97 for physical disability under the provisions of AFI 36-3212.
c L/ Director Air Force AIR FORCE IN THE MATTER OF: RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS DOCKET NUMBER: 97-00922 JUN 2 5 1998 HEARING DESIRED: YES 1 4 APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The decision of the Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB) be reversed and she be returned to active duty, with back pay and allowances, and all other benefits to which she is entitled. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant reviewed this application and opined that the applicant...
HEARING DESIRED: NO The appropriate Air Force off ices evaluated applicant s request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C ) . Based on the Sheppard Hospital psychiatric evaluation dated 29 Mar 91, it is reasonable to find that the member could have been recommended and processed through the Air Force disability evaluation system under the provisions of AFR 35-4 and referred to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB). REQUESTED ACTION:...