Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1996-02869A
Original file (BC-1996-02869A.doc) Auto-classification: Denied


                                 ADDENDUM TO
                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  96-02869
            INDEX NUMBER:  108.04
            COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her discharge for disability, with entitlement to  severance  pay,  be
changed to a medical retirement, with an 80% disability rating.

___________________________________________________________________

RESUME OF CASE:

A similar appeal was considered by the AFBCMR on  24  June  1997.   At
that time, the Board favorably considered applicant’s request to amend
AF Form 356 (Findings and Recommended  Disposition  of  USAF  Physical
Evaluation Board) to read:  “Disability was the  direct  result  of  a
combat related injury  -  yes.”   The  Board  denied  the  applicant’s
request for a medical retirement.  (Exhibits A through E)

By letter, dated 8 May 1998, applicant  requested  reconsideration  of
her request for disability retirement.  She stated  she  went  to  her
doctor and provided him with x-rays and a CT scan from the  Spring  of
1995.   He  stated  that  she  certainly  does   have   narrowing   or
irregularity of the joint space.  He also clearly stated there is  the
fusion at the L4/5 level and narrowing at the L5/S1  level.   This  is
definite proof that she qualifies for a 40 percent  disability  rating
on not one, but two separate joints.  Therefore,  by  regulation,  she
qualifies for an 80 percent disability rating and medical retirement.

Applicant’s complete statement, with attachment, is at Exhibit F.

___________________________________________________________________

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Chief, Medical Consultant, BCMR, reviewed applicant’s most  recent
submission and opined that no change in the records is  warranted  and
the application should be denied.  He stated the applicant  bases  her
request for an increase in disability award upon removal from the TDRL
on mainly a single physical finding of  disc  space  abnormality,  but
does not equate this to current symptoms, or, indeed, to symptoms  and
findings recorded at the time of her TDRL evaluation  in  early  1996.
What is not considered is the fact that simply having a  condition  or
disease does not equate to disability, but  rather  what  effect  that
condition or disease has on one’s ability to perform duties or to  the
limitations it imposes.  From evidence presented both at removal  from
the TDRL and current examinations, the applicant’s physical disability
clearly does not warrant a change in the degree of disability  awarded
by the Physical Evaluation Board in its decision  of  15  April  1996.
That she continues to  have  pain  from  her  back  condition  is  not
disputed; however, the degree of pain she is experiencing  is  minimal
per her current examinations and statements and something she does not
even need medications to control.  Nothing  in  her  TDRL  or  current
evaluations indicates residual effects greater than those  that  would
warrant her 20% award.  Evidence of record shows  that  the  applicant
was properly rated at the time of her final  disposition  and  removal
from the TDRL.  The new evidence submitted with her  current  rebuttal
statement fully supports this determination.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit G.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant disagreed with  the  advisory  opinion  and  reiterated  her
contentions that she has a very valid condition that is disabling  and
that will affect her for the rest of her life.   She  stated  she  has
proven conclusively time and again that she qualifies for retirement.

Applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit I.

___________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

After careful consideration of the applicant’s most recent submission,
including the subsequent medical opinion, we are  not  persuaded  that
she was inappropriately rated at the time  of  her  removal  from  the
Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) or that the  assigned  rating
was  contrary  to  governing  regulation  which  implements  the  law.
Therefore, we agree with the comments of the Chief Medical Consultant,
BCMR, and adopt his rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the
applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.   In  view
of the foregoing, and in the absence  of  evidence  showing  that  the
applicant was improperly  evaluated  or  that  the  final  rating  was
erroneous, we find no compelling basis to disturb the Board’s  earlier
decision denying the applicant’s request for a disability retirement.

___________________________________________________________________


THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of probable  material  error  or  injustice;
that the application was denied without  a  personal  appearance;  and
that 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  this  application  in
Executive Session on 16 October 1998 and 18 February 1999,  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Charles E. Bennett, Panel Chair
      Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Member
      Mr. Frederick R. Beaman III, Member

The following additional documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit F.  Letter from Applicant, dated 8 May 98, w/atchs.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 29 Jun 98.
    Exhibit H.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 29 Jun 98.
    Exhibit I.  Letter from Applicant, dated 8 Jul 98.




                                   CHARLES E. BENNETT
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9602869A

    Original file (9602869A.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s complete statement, with attachment, is at Exhibit F. ___________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Medical Consultant, BCMR, reviewed applicant’s most recent submission and opined that no change in the records is warranted and the application should be denied. From evidence presented both at removal from the TDRL and current examinations, the applicant’s physical disability clearly does not warrant a change in...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02049

    Original file (BC-2004-02049.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 17 May 1996, the applicant’s case was forwarded to the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) and they recommended the applicant be discharged with severance pay with a 20 percent disability rating. The Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) determines if the servicemember should be processed through the DES when a member is determined to be disqualified for continued military service. As noted by the Air Force office of primary responsibility, the time spent on the TDRL is not creditable...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02040

    Original file (BC-2004-02040.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPRRP states in accordance with 10 USC, Section 1208, the time the applicant spent on the TDRL is not creditable service for retirement. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded his time on the TDRL should be credited as active duty time. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01328

    Original file (BC-2004-01328.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01328 INDEX CODES: 121.02, 131.09 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her records be corrected to reflect she was promoted to the grade of staff sergeant (SSgt) effective 1 Mar 99; and, she receive back pay from 1 Mar 99 until the date her name was placed on the Temporary Disability Retired...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02671

    Original file (BC-2003-02671.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    She was granted a 60% evaluation because of her appeal but she is 100% disabled and unable to obtain employment. The Medical Consultant states a review of her service medical records show that at the time of permanent disability disposition, formal psychometric testing indicated her cognitive disorder produced a "considerable" Social and Industrial Adaptability Impairment that correlates with a 50% rating in the Veterans Administration Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). The Medical...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802599

    Original file (9802599.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    They subsequently reviewed and upheld the previous boards’ findings and recommendations and directed the applicant’s discharge with severance pay and a disability rating of 10 percent for physical disability. The applicant was found unfit for continued military service and was rated based on her condition at the time of her disability evaluation. Whereas the Air Force rates a member’s disability at the time of separation.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1997-03260A

    Original file (BC-1997-03260A.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 29 June 1998, the applicant submitted a request for reconsideration of the Board’s decision through his Congressman (Exhibit F). Accordingly, his request for reconsideration was denied (Exhibit G). Exhibit G. Letter from SAF/LLI to C/M McNulty, dated 3 Sep 98.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9703260A

    Original file (9703260A.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 29 June 1998, the applicant submitted a request for reconsideration of the Board’s decision through his Congressman (Exhibit F). Accordingly, his request for reconsideration was denied (Exhibit G). Exhibit G. Letter from SAF/LLI to C/M McNulty, dated 3 Sep 98.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-03405

    Original file (BC-2010-03405.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-03405 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her diagnosis of “Adrenal Insufficiency” be added to her AF Form 356, Findings and Recommended Disposition of USAF Physical Evaluation Board, dated 22 Jul 10,” and included as part of her overall disability rating. It should also be noted that had...

  • CG | BCMR | Disability Cases | 2003-069

    Original file (2003-069.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    This final decision, dated December 18, 2003, is signed by the three duly APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant, a former xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, asked the Board to correct her record to show that she was medically retired from the Coast Guard on January 9, 2002, with a 30% combined disability rating, including a 10% rating for neuritis of the left external popliteal nerve and a 20% rating for lumbar spondylosis, in accordance with the Veterans’ Affairs Schedule for Rating...