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


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  01-00658

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

In the applicant’s request for reconsideration,  she  requests  her  medical
record be reassessed and her medical condition at the time of  discharge  be
reevaluated based on differences between her military disability rating  and
subsequent Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) rating decisions.
_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

A Medical Evaluation Board (MEB)  was  convened  on  10  Aug  00  and  their
diagnosis and findings were: Fibromyalgia with mild C5-6  degenerative  disc
disease,  with  Sep  99  as  the  approximate  date  of  origin.   The   MEB
recommended referral to the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB).

On 22 Aug 00, an Informal Physical  Evaluation  Board  (IPEB)  convened  and
established a diagnosis of Fibromyalgia with chronic  pain  associated  with
degenerative disk disease,  C5-6  with  cervicalgia  and  headaches.   Other
diagnosis considered but not ratable:  Temporal  mandibular  joint  disease.
The IPEB found the  applicant  unfit  because  of  physical  disability  and
recommended discharge with severance pay with a  compensable  rating  of  20
percent.  On  12  Sep  00,  the  applicant  agreed  with  the  findings  and
recommended disposition of the IPEB and waived her right  to  a  Formal  PEB
(FPEB).

The applicant was discharged with an honorable discharge on 20 Nov 00  under
the provisions of AFI 36-3212 (Disability, Severance Pay).  At the  time  of
her separation, she was credited with 6 years, 10  months  and  11  days  of
active duty service.

A similar appeal was considered and denied by the Board on 17 Jun  01.   For
an accounting of the rationale of the earlier decision  by  the  Board,  see
the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit E.

The applicant has submitted a request for reconsideration,  contending  that
the MEB had erred in  their  decision.   Her  overall  concern  is  how  two
separate agencies, using the exact  same  guidelines  to  base  their  final
decision, differ so greatly in opinions.  To  support  this  assertion,  the
applicant provided a personal statement and  a  copy  of  the  DVA’s  rating
decision.  The applicant’s  complete  submission,  with  attachment,  is  at
Exhibit F.
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the AFBCMR Medical Consultant reviewed  the
applicant’s most recent submission and is of the opinion that no  change  in
the applicant’s records is warranted and the application should  be  denied.
The AFBCMR Medical Consultant stated that the reason the applicant could  be
found unfit for duty by the Air Force at  a  certain  disability  level  and
later be granted a higher service-connected disability by the  DVA  lies  in
understanding the differences between Title 10, U.S.C. and Title 38,  U.S.C.
 Title 10, U.S.C., 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.  The applicant’s only condition  that
rendered her unfit for continued  military  service  was  the  fibromyalgia,
with degenerative disc disease, that was judged to be no more than a  mildly
disabling  one,  and  separation  with  20%  disability  was   appropriately
recommended.  Title 38, U.S.C., 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 found unfit for service at a certain level  of  disability,  and  yet
soon thereafter receive a  higher  compensation  rating  from  the  DVA  for
service-connected, but  militarily  non-unfitting  conditions.   The  AFBCMR
Medical Consultant stated that the evidence  of  record  establishes  beyond
all reasonable doubt that the applicant was properly  evaluated  and  rated,
that separation for physical disability with a 20% rating  was  proper,  and
that no error or injustice occurred in this case.

The AFBCMR evaluation is at Exhibit G.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Having been  provided  the  advisory  opinion,  the  applicant  submitted  a
personal statement for the Board’s review in  which  she  relates  that  her
military  medical  record  and  information  pertaining  to   her   physical
examination and evaluation performed by the DVA’s physician demonstrate  the
possible existence of probable material error or  injustice.   Her  military
medical record contains supporting documentation in regards to  her  medical
condition and the severity prior to discharge.  She provided a copy  of  the
chronological record of medical care dictated by  the  Staff  Rheumatologist
at Wilford Hall Medical Center, who diagnosed her condition,  prior  to  her
separation  from  active  duty  service,  and  found  her  condition  to  be
moderately severe at that time.  She is assuming pertinent  information  was
inadvertently excluded from the MEB summary, which would have had a  greater
impact on the  Board’s  decision  at  the  time  of  review.   Although  the
information provided is dated 2 Feb 02, it reflects back to the time of  her
initial diagnosis.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit I.
_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

After again reviewing this application and the evidence provided in  support
of the appeal, we do not find it provides adequate support  for  a  revision
of the previous findings in this case.  While  the  applicant  believes  the
Medical Evaluation Board  (MEB)  did  not  review  evidence  concerning  her
medical treatment, no evidence  has  been  presented  to  substantiate  this
claim.  Inasmuch as the Informal Physical Evaluation  Board  (IPEB)  reviews
all the medical records and pertinent documentation of the member  prior  to
rendering their findings, we believe the documents in  question,  which  are
included in her medical records, were reviewed by the IPEB at  the  time  of
their review.  Therefore, it is our opinion that the applicant was  properly
evaluated and rated for her conditions.   With  regard  to  the  differences
between  the  applicant’s  military   disability   rating   and   subsequent
Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) rating decisions, we note that the  DVA
rates for any and all service  connected  conditions,  to  the  degree  they
interfere  with  future  employability  and  social  adaptability,   without
consideration of fitness; whereas the Air Force rates a member’s  disability
based on their ability to perform his or her duties at  the  time  of  final
disposition.  In  the  absence  of  persuasive  evidence  by  the  applicant
indicating that her separation for disability was erroneous or  contrary  to
the governing regulation, which  implements  the  law,  we  agree  with  the
opinion and recommendation of the AFBCMR Medical Consultant  and  adopt  the
rationale expressed as the basis for our decision  that  the  applicant  has
failed to sustain her burden that she has suffered either  an  error  or  an
injustice.  In view  of  the  foregoing,  we  find  no  basis  on  which  to
favorably consider the requested relief.
_________________________________________________________________

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 23 September 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. Joseph A. Roj, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Roscoe Hinton Jr., Member
                 Mr. Mike Novel, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with  AFBCMR
Docket Number 01-00658.

      Exhibit E.  Record of Proceedings, dated 27 Jun 01,
                with Exhibits.
      Exhibit F.  Applicant’s Letter, dated 20 Jan 02, with
                attachment.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, dated
                14 Feb 02.
    Exhibit H.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 19 Feb 02.
      Exhibit I.  Applicant’s Letter, dated 24 Jun 02, with
                attachments.



                                   JOSEPH A. ROJ
                                   Panel Chair