RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02788
INDEX NUMBER: 108.00
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None
XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: Yes
____________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His disability discharge with severance pay be changed to a disability
retirement.
____________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The options he was offered during his Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) were
unjust. Up to the time of his MEB he was actively carrying out his duties
as a Weapons Director, Instructor, and Evaluator. He was also the only
Air Surveillance Technician evaluator in his unit. The recommendation
from the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) did not take this into
consideration in reaching their conclusion that he be separated from
service. He was discharged for an ailment that he had while doing his
part to support a non-stop mission tempo. Prior to his MEB, he did
consider the option of separating, but changed his mind when he realized
that the benefits were lacking when compared to medical or regular
retirement. He also found out that information he had been given
regarding the payment of severance pay if he separated was wrong.
He believes that he should have been given the option of continuing his
active duty service until normal retirement or given a medical retirement
if his condition was so severe as to warrant his separation.
In support of his appeal, the applicant has provided medical statements
attesting to the severity of his ailment and justification for a higher
disability rating, a copy of the findings and recommended disposition of
the PEB, and a copy of his rebuttal to the PEB.
The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_____________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant entered the Air Force on 10 Jul 85. He was disability
discharged with severance pay (20%) on 13 Aug 02 for low back pain
associated with intervertebral disc syndrome. A review of the applicant’s
last ten enlisted performance reports (EPRs) ending with the report closing
1 Sep 01 indicates overall ratings of “5.” The remaining relevant facts
pertaining to this application are contained in the evaluations prepared by
the appropriate offices of the Air Force found at Exhibits C and D.
____________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial of the applicant’s requests.
The applicant was disability discharged with severance pay for low back
pain related to intervertebral disc syndrome. He contends that his
condition was severe enough at the time of his PEB to justify disability
retirement. The DOD uses the Veterans Administration (VA) Schedule of
Ratings for Disabilities (VASRD) as a guide when compensating for
disability that cuts a career short. For intervertebral disc syndrome,
the VASRD provides guidelines for ratings from zero percent to a maximum
of 60%. The applicant’s condition was rated by the PEB as “moderate
recurring attacks” at 20%. The evidence of record does not support that
the applicant suffered symptoms warranting a higher disability rating.
Findings and recommendations of the PEB were sustained at all levels of
review and approved by the Air Force Personnel Board. There is no
evidence to support a higher rating at the time of permanent disposition.
The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.
AFPC/DPPD recommends denial of the applicant’s request.
Disability processing records reflect that the applicant was presented
before an MEB and the results referred to the Informal PEB (IPEB) for
adjudication. The Board diagnosed his lower back pain as unfitting for
continued military service and recommended he be discharged with
entitlement to severance pay with a 20 percent disability rating under the
provisions of Title 10, USC, Section 1203. The applicant disagreed with
the Board’s findings and requested a formal hearing of his case.
On 22 Apr 02, the service member appeared before the Formal PEB (FPEB)
assisted by an appointed legal counsel. The Board reviewed the
preponderance of evidence, which included additional documentation and
testimony presented by the applicant prior to agreeing with the IPEB’s
findings and recommendation. The applicant once again disagreed with the
findings and elected to submit a written rebuttal to the Secretary of the
Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC). His rebuttal requested that his
medical condition be evaluated as 40 percent disabling or higher.
Consequently, SAFPC adjudicated his case and directed that he be
discharged with entitlement to severance pay.
The complete evaluation is at Exhibit D.
_____________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 6
Dec 02 for review and comment within 30 days. To date, a response has not
been received.
_____________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or
regulations.
2. The application was timely filed.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant's
complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree
with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary
responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion
that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no
compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this
application.
4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been
shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially
add to our understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, the request
for a hearing is not favorably considered.
_____________________________________________________________
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 Docket Number 02-02788 in
Executive Session on 4 February 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Joseph G. Diamond, Panel Chair
Mr. John B. Hennessey, Member
Ms. Martha Maust, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 16 Aug 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Memorandum, BCMR Medical Consultant,
dated 29 Oct 02.
Exhibit D. Memorandum, AFPC/DPPD, dated 2 Dec 02.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 6 Dec 02.
JOSEPH G. DIAMOND
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02712
The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant indicates in her response to the Air Force evaluation that she disagrees with the BCMR Medical Consultant’s statement of her request. AF Form 618, Medical Board Report, coupled with the narrative summaries/consultations, commander’s letters, etc., address her unfitting conditions as required for review by the PEB. Disability...
___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: The Chief Medical Consultant, AFBCMR, reviewed this application and recommended that the Board either grant the applicant’s request and award a disability separation with 10% disability for degenerative disc disease, mild, rated under VASRD Code 5293, Intervertebral Disc Syndrome or, direct that a special review be accomplished by the Disability Branch to review all pertinent information relating to...
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01821
After the disc decompression procedure performed 8 months prior to separation, the CI did experience relief from the radicular symptoms while his back pain persisted. BOARD FINDINGS : IAW DoDI 6040.44, provisions of DoD or Military Department regulations or guidelines relied upon by the PEB will not be considered by the Board to the extent they were inconsistent with the VASRD in effect at the time of the adjudication.As discussed above, PEB reliance on DoDI 1332.39 for rating chronic back...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01206
Subsequent to being evaluated by the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) and Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB), the applicant was released from active duty under the provisions of AFR 35-4 (Placed on Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL)). Following a period of observation and treatment on TDRL status, he was permanently disability retired on 12 Jun 1986, with a disability rating of 40 percent for his condition and received pay in the grade of colonel, with over 26 years...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03285
The FPEB recommended discharge with severance pay with a disability rating of 20%. The complete Medical Consultant evaluation is at exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant responded stating the Air Force would not allow him to fix his back while on active duty. Therefore, we recommend that his records be corrected as indicated below.
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...
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 | CY2010 | BC-2009-00798
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-00798 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect that he received a medical discharge or medical retirement, rather than an administrative discharge based on minor disciplinary infractions. The complete BCMR Medical Consultants evaluation is at...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090020868
The applicant states in rebuttal to the original Record of Proceedings: * he has documented active federal service of 19 years, 3 months, and 16 days * he is entitled to the "presumption for fitness rule" * the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) did not evaluate his performance of duties in his primary military occupational specialty (PMOS) * the PEB used a diagnostic code prohibited by Department of Defense Instruction (DODI), which misrepresented his injury * the PEB used worldwide...
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00604
He was then medically separated with that disability rating. The Board does not have the authority under DoDI 6040.44 to render fitness or rating recommendations for any conditions not considered by the DES. I have carefully reviewed the evidence of record and the recommendation of the Board.