AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

IN THE MATTER OF: 

DOCKET NO:  97-00051 
COUNSEL : 
HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

Applicant  requests that  her  separation be  changed to a medical 
'retirement.  Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A. 

The appropriate Air Force offices 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  her  counsel  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 opinions appear to be  based  on 
the evidence of record and have not been rebutted by applicant or 
counsel.  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 Mr. Vaughn E .   Schlunz, Ms. Dorothy P. Loeb, 
and  Mr.  David  W.  Mulgrew  considered  this  application  on 
5 February 1998  in accordance with  the provisions of  Air  Force 
Instruction 36-2603, and the governing statute, 10, U.S.C. 1552. 

Panel Chair 

Exhibits : 
A.  Applicant's DD Form 149 
B.  Available Master Personnel Records 
C.  Advisory Opinions 
D.  SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinions 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE 

HEADQUARTERS AIR FORCE PERSONNEL CENTER 

RANDOLPH AIR FORCE BASE, TEXAS 

26 Aug 97 

MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR 

FROM: 

HQ AFPCDPPD 
550 C Street West Ste 06 
Randolph AFB TX 78 150-4708 

SUBJECT: 

Military Recor 

W E S F J I  ACTION:  Applicant requests that her honorable discharge be changed to 

a medical retirement. 

FACE:  Applicant voluntarily separated from the Air Force on 9 Nov 91 upon 

completion of three years, six months, and twenty-seven days of active duty upon completion of 
her active duty service commitment under AFR 36-12. 

DISCUSSION:  The purpose of the military disability system is to maintain a fit and vital 
force by separating members who are unable to perform the duties of their grade, office, rank or 
rating.  Those members who are separated or retired by reason of physical disability may be 
eligible, if otherwise qualified, for certain disability compensations.  Eligibility for disability 
processing is established by a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) when that board finds that the 
member may not be qualified for continued military service.  The decision to conduct an MEB is 
made by the medical treatment facility providing health care to the member. 

A review of the applicant's records reflects that member underwent surgical procedures 
for removal of the thyroid and received radioactive iodine treatment during period of Aug 91. 
She subsequently met a MEB in Oct 91, was found fit, qualified for continued military service, 
and was returned to duty by medical personnel within the medical board system.  Her case was 
never entered into the Air Force disability evaluation system.  The applicant's medical condition 
and history is hlly explained by the Medical Consultant; we concur with his advisory.  The 
medical record clearly shows that while the applicant may have been treated for various medical 
conditions while on active duty, none were serious enough to render her d i t  for further military 
service under the provisions of disability law and policy.  Member was fit for duty upon her 
Nov 91 separation from active duty. 

13 Jun 97 
97-00051 

MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR 

FROM:  BCMR Medical Consultant 

1535 Command Drive, EE Wing, 3rd Floor 
Andrews AFB MD  20762-7002 

Applicant's entire case file has been reviewed and is forwarded with the following findings, 

conclusions and recommendations. 

REQUESTED ACTION:  The applicant electively separated under the provisions of AFR 36- 

12 on 9 Nov 91 after serving 3 years, 6 months, 27 days on active duty.  She now applies 
requesting the records be changed to show a medical discharge based on disability benefits 
awarded by the DVA. 

FACTS:  Evidence of record and medical examinations prior to separation indicate the 

applicant was fit and medically qualified for continued military service or appropriate separation 
and did not have any physical or mental condition which would have warranted consideration 
under the provisions of AFM 35-4. She had been diagnosed with papillary carcinoma of the 
thyroid in August 1990 and underwent surgical removal of the thyroid and subsequent 
radioactive iodine treatment for residual disease in August 1991. She subsequently met a 
Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) and was returned to duty in Oct 91, having been found fit for 
same.  She had applied for separation which was effective on noted date.  She was  later 
granted 100% disability by the DVA for the year following the radiation therapy and then 
reduced to 30% appropriately when no residual disease was found on reexamination. Action 
and disposition in this case are proper and reflect compliance with Air Force directives which 
implement the law. 

DISCUSSION:  The reason why the applicant could be declared fit for duty by the Air 
Force and later be granted 100% service-connected disability by the Department of Veterans 
Affairs (DVA) lies in understanding the differences between Title 10, USC, and Title 38, USC.. 
Title 10,  USC, Chapter 61 is the federal statute that charges the Service Secretaries with 
maintaining a fit and vital force.  For an individual to be considered unfit for military service, 
there must be a medical condition so severe that it prevents performance of any work 
commensurate with rank and experience.  Once this determination is made, namely that the 
individual is unfit, disability rating percentage is based upon the member's condition at the time 
of permanent disposition, and not upon possible future events. Congress, very wisely, 
recognized that a person can acquire physical conditions which, although not unfitting at the 
time of separation, may later progress in severity and alter the individual's lifestyle and future 
employability.  With this in mind, Title 38, USC which governs the DVA compensation system 
was written to allow awarding compensation ratings for conditions that are not unfitting for 
military service.  This is the reason why an individual can be considered fit for military duty up to 
the day of separation or retirement, and yet soon thereafter receive a compensation rating from 
the DVA for service-connected, but militarily non-unfitting condition. 

Evidence of record establishes beyond all reasonable doubt that the applicant was 

medically qualified for continued active duty, that the reason for her separation was proper, and 
that no error or injustice occurred in this case. 

RECOMMENDATION: The Medical Consultant for the BCMR recommends that the 

application be denied. 

FREDERICK W. HORNICK, Col., USAF, MC, FS 
Chief, Medical Consultant, BCMR 
Medical Advisor SAF Personnel Council