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

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  93-02644
                                        INDEX CODE:  108.02

                                        COUNSEL:  NONE

                                        HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

In the applicant’s request for reconsideration, he requests  the  percentage
he was awarded  on  the  Permanent  Disability  Retirement  List  (PDRL)  be
increased from 30% to 100%.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant was  honorably  discharged  on  16  July  1982  by  reason  of
marginal performance.  He had served 2 years,  10  months  and  13  days  on
active duty.  By application dated 1  June  1993,  the  applicant  requested
that his records be corrected to show he received a medical discharge.   His
request was considered and denied by  the  Board  on  April  17,  1994  (see
Exhibit E).

The applicant’s requests for reconsideration of his  application,  dated  17
January 1995 and 5 April 1995, were denied  since  they  did  not  meet  the
criteria for reconsideration by the Board.

On 26 May 1996, the applicant requested reconsideration of his  application,
contending that, based on a diagnosis of Schizoaffective  Disorder,  he  had
been awarded Veterans Administrative (VA) disability ratings of 30%  from  2
July 1985 and 100% from 29 March 1986.  The Board considered his request  on
19 November 1996.  The Board majority recommended  denial.   The  dissenting
member recommended the records be corrected to show the applicant was  unfit
because of  physical  disability  with  a  compensable  rating  of  30%  and
submitted a Minority Report for review.  On 3 February 1997,  the  Director,
Air Force Review Boards Agency accepted the minority  member’s  opinion  and
directed that the records be corrected to show that on  16  July  1982,  the
applicant was unfit to perform the duties of  his  office,  rank,  grade  or
rating by reason of physical disability incurred while entitled  to  receive
basic pay; that the diagnosis in his case is Schizophrenia,  residual  type,
definite impairment of social and industrial  adaptability,  VA  Code  9205,
rated  at  30%;  that  the  total  compensable  rating  was  30%;  that  the
disability was permanent; that the disability was  not  due  to  intentional
misconduct or willful neglect; that the disability was not  incurred  during
a period of unauthorized absence;  that  the  disability  was  not  incurred
during a period of national emergency;  and  that  the  disability  was  not
received in the line of duty as a direct result of armed conflict.   It  was
further directed the records be corrected to show that on 17 July 1982,  his
name was placed on the Permanent Disability Retired List (PDRL).  A copy  of
the proceedings concerning this matter is attached at Exhibit F.

On  1  March   2003,   the   applicant   submitted   a   letter   requesting
reconsideration  of  the  percentage  he  was  awarded  on   the   Permanent
Disability Retirement  List.   He  is  requesting  that  his  percentage  be
changed to the  rating  of  100%,  starting  from  the  time  he  was  first
discharged from the Air Force on 16 July 1982.  In support  of  his  request
he submits a letter, with attachments,  from  the  Veterans  Service  Center
Manager  stating  that  the  applicant  has  a  combined   service-connected
disability evaluation of 100%.

Applicant’s request, with attachments, is at Exhibit G.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant states that the applicant does not  provide  any
new evidence as it related to rating his  disability  at  the  time  of  his
discharge.  The evidence provided by the applicant was available  and  known
to the BCMR at the time it rendered its decision in 1997.

The applicant’s request that his permanent Air Force  disability  retirement
rating coincide  with  the  higher  rating  granted  by  the  Department  of
Veterans Affairs was considered by the BCMR in  their  1997  decision.   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  Department  of   Veterans   Affairs   (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.   Once  an  individual  has  been
declared unfit, the Service Secretaries are required  by  law  to  rate  the
condition based upon the degree of  disability  at  the  time  of  permanent
disposition and not on future events.  No change in disability  ratings  can
occur after permanent disposition, even  though  the  condition  may  become
better or worse.  However, Title 38, U.S.C. authorizes the  VA  to  increase
or decrease compensation ratings based upon the  individual’s  condition  at
the time of future evaluations.

The applicant states that he intends  on  applying  for  concurrent  receipt
(Combat Related Special Compensation).  At the present,  that  law  provides
for concurrent receipt of military retired pay and  Department  of  Veterans
Affairs disability compensation to former military retirees  with  20  years
or more of service and combat related disabilities that equal or exceed  60%
disability rating (10%, if those disabilities are directly due  to  injuries
that resulted in award of the Purple Heart Medal) as  rated  by  either  the
military or the Department of Veterans  Affairs.   The  applicant  does  not
have the equivalent of 20 years  of  active  duty,  nor  is  his  disability
combat related.  Increasing his  Air  Force  disability  rating  to  50%  or
greater would not qualify him for concurrent receipt.

The BCMR Medical Consultant is of the opinion that  action  and  disposition
in this case are proper and equitable reflecting compliance with  Air  Force
directives that implement the law and, therefore,  that  no  change  in  the
records is warranted.

A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit H.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 9  July
2003 for review and comment.  As of this date, this office has  received  no
response.

________________________________________________________________

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  error  or  injustice.   After  again  reviewing  the  evidence
provided  in  support  of  the  appeal,  we  remain  unpersuaded  that   the
applicant’s records are in error or that  he  has  been  the  victim  of  an
injustice.   His  contentions  are  noted;  however,  in  our  opinion,  the
detailed  comments  provided  by  the  BCMR  Medical  Consultant  adequately
address those allegations.  As  a  result  of  the  reconsideration  of  the
applicant’s appeal in late 1996 and early 1997, in  order  to  preclude  any
injustice to the applicant, his  records  were  corrected  to  show  he  was
retired because of physical disability with a  compensable  rating  of  30%,
rather than discharged because of marginal  performance.   He  now  requests
that his records be corrected to show that he was rated as 100% disabled  at
the time of his permanent disposition in 1982.  We note that the VA did  not
grant the applicant service  connection  and  compensation  until  1985,  at
which time his condition was rated at 30%.   By  law,  once  the  Air  Force
approves a final disposition because of  a  disability,  the  responsibility
for compensation for an increase in the  severity  of  the  condition  falls
under the jurisdiction of the VA.  Other than his own  assertions,  we  have
seen nothing  in  the  available  evidence  that  would  indicate  that  the
applicant’s condition warranted a higher rating than 30% at the time of  his
retirement in 1982.  Therefore, we agree with opinion and recommendation  of
the BCMR Medical Consultant and adopt his rationale as  the  basis  for  the
conclusion that the applicant has  not  been  the  victim  of  an  error  or
injustice.  In  the  absence  of  evidence  to  the  contrary,  we  find  no
compelling  basis  to  recommend  granting  the  relief   sought   in   this
application.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented  did  not  demonstrate
the existence of 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,  93-02644,
in Executive Session on 25 September 2003, under the provisions of  AFI  36-
2603:

                       Mr. Robert S. Boyd, Panel Chair
                       Mr. James E. Short, Member
                       Ms. Martha J. Evans, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit E. Record of Proceedings, dated 17 Apr 94, w/atchs.
      Exhibit F. Record of Proceedings, dated 3 Feb 97, w/atchs.
      Exhibit G. Applicant’s Letter, dated 1 Mar 03, w/atchs.
      Exhibit H. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 7 Jul 03.




                             ROBERT S. BOYD
                             Panel Chair