RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-01437
INDEX CODE: 108.02
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His 10 percent disability rating for his disability retirement be increased
to 30 percent.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He has been treated unfairly and has served his country for over twenty
years.
The applicant states that throughout his career, he has struggled with
medical problems and did not allow them to slow him down. His back surgery
in February 1999 has dramatically changed his life. He is in constant
pain, and has decreased flexibility, sitting and/or standing for long
periods of time aggravates his back and without medication sleeping is
difficult.
In support of the appeal, applicant submits personal statements and
correspondence to his Member of Congress.
The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 19 July 2000, the applicant received a permanent disability retirement
in the grade of master sergeant with a compensable percentage for physical
disability of 10 percent. He completed 21 years, 2 months, and 13 days of
active service for retirement.
The relevant medical facts pertaining to this application, extracted from
the applicant’s military medical records, are contained in the letters
prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force. Accordingly, there
is no need to recite these facts in this Record of Proceedings.
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Chief, Special Actions/BCMR Advisories, AFPC/DPPD, reviewed the
application and states the purpose of the military disability evaluation
system is to maintain a fit and vital force by separating or retiring
members who are unable to perform the duties of their office, grade, rank
or rating. Members who are separated or retired by reason of a physical
disability may be eligible for certain disability compensations. The
determination to process a member through the military disability
evaluation system is made by a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB), when it has
been determined the member is medically disqualified for continued military
service. The applicant has not submitted any material or documentation to
show any errors or injustices were committed at the time of his disability
processing. Therefore, they recommend the application be denied.
A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and states that he agreed
with the determination of unfitness; however, he did not agree with the
compensable disability percentage that was assigned. In addition, he was
advised by representatives from Cannon AFB that he could refute the
percentage at any time, which he did.
The applicant’s complete response is attached at Exhibit E.
ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The BCMR Medical Consultant reviewed the application and states that
applicant was properly evaluated and rated per VASRD Code 5295, Lumbosacral
strain. There is no evidence to support a higher rating at the time and
the applicant accepted this by indorsing the recommendation of the Informal
Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) and declining his right to further review
by the Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB). While appreciating the
applicant’s ongoing problem with pain associated with a congenital back
condition, there is no evidence of the problem warranting a higher
disability rating. Therefore, the BCMR Medical Consultant is of the
opinion that no change in the record is warranted.
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit F.
APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A complete copy of the evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 10
August 2000, for review and response within 30 days. However, as of this
date, no response has been received by this office.
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or
regulations.
2. The application was timely filed.
3. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of probable error or injustice to warrant the applicant’s
evaluation through the Air Force Disability Evaluation System. In this
respect, we note that in February 1999 the applicant underwent back surgery
to fuse his L5-S1 vertebrae disc. At the recommendation of a Medical
Evaluation Board, the applicant was presented to an Informal Physical
Evaluation Board (IPEB). The IPEB recommended the applicant be permanently
retired with a 10 percent disability rating. The applicant agreed with the
IPEB findings; however, he states that while he agreed with the
determination of unfitness, he did not agree with the compensable
disability percentage that was assigned and was advised that he could
refute the assigned disability percentage at any time. Furthermore, the
applicant contends that since his records were incomplete at the time of
the evaluation, his complete record was not reviewed. In view of this, and
based on a preponderance of the evidence presented, we believe the interest
of justice can best be served by having the applicant processed through the
Air Force Disability System, prior to rendering a final decision on his
request. We note that during this evaluation, if the applicant disagrees
with the IPEB findings, he will have the right to present his case to a
Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB). Therefore, we recommend his
records be corrected to the extent indicated below.
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating
to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that invitational travel orders be
issued by competent authority for the purpose of evaluation by a Medical
Evaluation Board (MEB), Physical Evaluation Board (PEB), and Formal
Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB); that the results of the evaluation be
forwarded to the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records at the
earliest practicable date so that all necessary and appropriate actions may
be completed; and that all charges for the physical examination be waived.
The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive
Session on 5 October 2000, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Gregory H. Petkoff, Panel Chair
Mr. Steven A. Shaw, Member
Mr. George Franklin, Member
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The following
documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 May 00, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 14 Jun 00.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 30 Jun 00.
Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 26 Jun 00.
Exhibit F. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 9 Aug 00.
Exhibit G. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 10 Aug 00.
GREGORY H. PETKOFF
Panel Chair
AFBCMR 00-01437
MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF
Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force
Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section
1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that invitational travel orders
be issued by competent authority for the purpose of evaluation by a Medical
Evaluation Board (MEB), Physical Evaluation Board (PEB), and Formal
Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB); that the results of the evaluation be
forwarded to the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records at the
earliest practicable date so that all necessary and appropriate actions may
be completed; and, that all charges for the physical examination be, and
hereby are, waived.
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
After reviewing this Board’s prior recommendation and noting the current evaluation conducted by the Air Force, we recommend that applicant’s record be corrected to show that he received a disability rating of 20 percent at the time of his retirement. Applicant’s request for a disability rating of 30 percent was considered; however, in view of the findings of the evaluation board on 7 May 2001 and since applicant concurred with the rating at that time, we find no basis upon which to...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03095
On 6 March 2000, the applicant submitted her rebuttal letter to SAFPC requesting a disability retirement, with a compensable disability rating of 40 percent. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: The BCMR Medical Consultant summarized the information contained in the applicant’s personnel and medical records and is of the opinion that the preponderance of the evidence of the record supports a disability rating of 20 percent. A complete...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-00545
After the review the IPEB determined his PTSD rendered him unfit for further service and recommended he be placed on the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) with a compensable percentage of 50 percent. The applicant did not concur with the findings and recommended disposition of the IPEB and requested a formal PEB (FPEB). The Medical Consultant states the preponderance of the record supports the PEB rating of 50 percent for his PTSD.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00371
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends the application be denied. Following DPPD’s assessment, they conclude the applicant was treated fairly throughout the military Disability Evaluation System (DES) process, that he was properly rated under federal disability guidelines at the time of his evaluation, and that he was afforded the opportunity for further review as provided by federal law and policy. As...
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 applicant states that on 18 October 2001 she indicated her intent to submit an appeal to the Air Force Personnel Board (AFPB) via the formal board. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends granting her present request for further consideration by the AFPB while she is receiving her current 60% disability. THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ Vice Chair AFBCMR 01-03585 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03318
The IPEB recommended that he be discharged from the Air Force with an EPTS condition. The applicant was discharged from the Air Force on 10 Oct 02, with a compensable disability rating of 10 percent. This code assigns disability rating based on percent of body surface and use of medications.
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-01005
The AFPC/DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit C. The BCMR Medical Consultant is of the opinion that the applicant’s total combined permanent disability percentage should be increased from 40 to 60 percent to reflect the severe nature of his bilateral foot pain, which prevented him from reasonably performing his military duties. In the applicant’s case, the Air Force limited its unfit finding to his bilateral foot condition since that was the only condition limiting the performance of his military...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00249
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00249 INDEX CODE: 108.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His disability rating be changed to 100 percent rather than 40 percent. The Veterans’ Administration (VA) has rated his service- connected disability at 100 percent and permanently and totally disabled. DPPD’s complete evaluation...
Based on the firm statement of the FPEB, the evidence of record supports the contention that the applicant was rated properly and that no injustice occurred in his separation processing upon which to recommend favorable consideration of his present request. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Complete copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to...