Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 9900626
Original file (9900626.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  99-00626
            INDEX NO.:  108.08
            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

Applicant requests that AF Form 356 (Findings  and  Recommended  Disposition
of USAF Physical Evaluation Board), dated 22  June  1994,  be  corrected  to
reflect that his injury was caused by an “instrumentality of war”  and  that
his disability rating be increased from 40 to 50 percent  to  coincide  with
his current Department  of  Veterans  Affairs  (DVA)  ratings.   Applicant's
submission is at Exhibit A.

On 27 September 1999, the  USAF  Physical  Disability  Division,  AFPC/DPPD,
administratively corrected the  applicant’s  records  to  reflect  that  his
injury  was  the  result  of  an  “instrumentality  of  war”  and  that  his
disability  was  “not”  the  direct  result  of  a  combat  related  injury.
Therefore, the only issue remaining to be resolved  is  applicant’s  request
for an increase in his disability rating.

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/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
opinion appear to be based on the evidence  of  record  and  have  not  been
rebutted by applicant/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. Charles E. Bennett, Mr. Gregory  H.  Petkoff,  and
Mr. Charlie E. Williams  Jr.,  considered  this  application  on  27 January
2000, in accordance with the provisions of  Air  Force  Instruction  36-2603
and the governing statute, 10 U.S.C. 1552.




                                    CHARLES E. BENNETT
                                    Panel Chair

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

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1996-02869A

    Original file (BC-1996-02869A.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 | 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-2004-02228

    Original file (BC-2004-02228.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02228 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His WD AGO Form 53-55 - Enlisted Record and Report of Separation Honorable Discharge, reflect award of the Purple Heart (PH) Medal. They researched the applicant’s personnel record and documents attached to the WD AGO 53-55; they...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 9900259

    Original file (9900259.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 counsel for review and response (Exhibit D). 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.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9800185

    Original file (9800185.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). No such evidence is found in this record, and, therefore, the applicant’s request for a disability discharge cannot be granted. RECOMMENDATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant is of the opinion that the applicant’s request for a medical disability discharge is not supported by evidence of records and his request should, therefore, be denied.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802564

    Original file (9802564.doc) Auto-classification: 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’s responses to the advisory opinions are 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. Available Master Personnel Records C. Advisory Opinions D. AFBCMR Ltr Forwarding Advisory...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-1995-03416-2

    Original file (BC-1995-03416-2.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit G. On 2 August 2003, applicant requested that his case be temporarily withdrawn until he had sufficient time to prepare a proper response. Complete copies of the evaluations are at Exhibits J and K. _______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Counsel for the applicant submitted a statement indicating that this is a simple case. The only question now before the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2002-01061-2

    Original file (BC-2002-01061-2.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    By letter, dated 6 Sep 05, the applicant requests reconsideration of his appeal. Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit J. Exhibit M. Letter, applicant, dated 23 Dec 05.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9900582

    Original file (9900582.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 for review and response (Exhibit D). Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9603751

    Original file (9603751.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    'The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request .and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The records indicate that the applicant met a Medical Evaluation Board on 28 Aug 73, and his history then reflected back pain which was not further evaluated, nor was this done on subsequent reevaluations when he continued to note the back pain on the medical history form. Even assuming the minimal compression fracture noted some...