RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  00-01416

            COUNSEL:  The American Legion

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His involuntary disability discharge with severance pay be set  aside,
and he be awarded a  disability  retirement  and  his  medical  record
reflect a 30 percent disability.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was discharged due to multiple  disabilities  with  severance  pay,
established as 20  percent  disabling.   The  Department  of  Veterans
Affairs (DVA) has considered him 30 percent disabled from the date  of
his discharge from service.

Applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 20  May  68  for  a
period of four (4) years.

The applicant was involved in a head-on collision with  an  automobile
while riding his motorcycle in Puerto Rico where he was  stationed  in
1971.  He suffered severe injuries of his right elbow and  a  fracture
of  the  right  upper  leg  bone  (femur)  that   required   extensive
hospitalizations and multiple surgical procedures before stabilization
of the bones was achieved.

Because of his residual disabilities,  and  because  he  had  been  on
profile for over a year, he was  presented  to  a  medical  evaluation
board in November 1972 and referred to the Physical  Evaluation  Board
(PEB) on 4 December 1972.  He concurred with their recommendation  for
placement on the Temporary  Disability  Retired  List  (TDRL)  with  a
combined rating of 60 percent for the fractures.

The applicant was involuntarily released from  active  duty  on     26
December 1972 for a physical disability and placed on the  TDRL  under
the provisions of AFM 35-4.

The DVA subsequently rated him 20 percent for the elbow residuals  and
10 percent for minor limitation of motion of the knee for a total  30%
compensable disability rating on 9 August 1973.

He was reevaluated in early 1974 and recommended by the  informal  PEB
for return to duty with which he non-concurred.  The Formal PEB (FPEB)
determined he was unfit for  duty,  finding  continued  limitation  of
motion in the elbow to be 10 percent  disabling  and  finding  minimal
residual knee problems  warranting  10  percent  compensation.   Their
recommendation for separation with severance pay was accepted  by  the
applicant.  This occurred while he was on TDRL

The applicant was discharged on July 1974 in the grade of sergeant (E-
4), with entitlement to severance pay with  a  20  percent  disability
rating.  Member completed four years, seven months, and seven days  of
active federal military service.
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Chief Medical Consultant, AFBCMR,  reviewed  the  application  and
recommended denial.  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 C.

The Chief, Special Actions/BCMR Advisories,  AFPC/DPPD,  reviewed  the
application and recommended denial.   Under  the  military  disability
laws  and  policy,  USAF  disability  boards  can  only  rate  medical
conditions based upon the member’s situation at the time of his or her
evaluation; in essence a snapshot of their  condition  at  that  time.
Under Title 38, USC, the DVA may rate  any  service-connected  medical
condition based upon  future  employability  or  reevaluate  based  on
changes in the  severity  of  a  condition.   This  often  results  in
different ratings by the two agencies.

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  the
applicant’s counsel on 17  November  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 not timely filed;  however,  it  is  in  the
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

3.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of probable error or injustice.  We took notice  of  the
applicant's complete submission in judging the  merits  of  the  case;
however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force
and adopt their rationale as the basis for  our  conclusion  that  the
applicant has not been the victim  of  an  error  or  injustice.   Its
appears the applicant believes the DAV’s decision to award him  a  30%
disability rating for a femur and elbow fracture,  substantiates  that
his condition  should  have  been  rated  higher  by  the  Air  Force.
However, we note that although the  Air  Force  is  required  to  rate
disabilities  in  accordance  with  the   VA   Schedule   for   Rating
Disabilities, the VA operates under a totally separate system  with  a
different statutory basis.  In this respect, we note that the VA rates
for any and all service  connected  conditions,  to  the  degree  they
interfere with future employability, without consideration of fitness.
 Whereas the Air Force  rates  member’s  disability  at  the  time  of
separation.   In  the  applicant’s  case,  at  the   time   of   final
disposition, the Air  Force  found  his  conditions  to  be  only  20%
disabling and the applicant’s submission does  not  persuade  us  that
this was in error.  Therefore, in  the  absence  of  evidence  to  the
contrary, we find  no  compelling  basis  to  recommend  granting  his
request for a 30% disability rating.

_________________________________________________________________

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 22 Feb 01, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. Gregory H. Petkoff, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Jackson A. Hauslein, Member
                 Ms. Barbara J. White-Olson, Member


The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 5 May 00, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 31 Aug 00.
      Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 31 Oct 00.
      Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 17 Nov 00.






      GREGORY H. PETKOFF
      Panel Chair