Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03941
Original file (BC-2002-03941.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-03941

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be awarded a partial disability rating for vision loss in his right eye.

_________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was told during a physical  examination  at  the  end  of  his  four-year
enlistment that, due to his eyesight in his  right  eye,  he  would  not  be
eligible to reenlist.

In support of the appeal, the applicant submits a copy of his DD  Form  214,
Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

A  Report  of  Medical  Examination,  prepared  in  conjunction   with   the
applicant’s 6 March 1956 enlistment  physical,  states  that  the  applicant
had, “right esotropia (cross-eyed), 10  degrees  without  fixation  residual
from esotropia surgery  at  age  5.   Not  considered  disqualifying.   Left
Suppression amblyopia (dimness of vision) also not considered  disqualifying
e.3.”

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air  Force  on  8  March  1956  for  a
period of four years.

On 17 November 1956, he shot himself in the left upper  chest,  with  a  .45
caliber pistol.  He was admitted to the 6407th USAF Hospital on  that  date,
treated for his injury, and released on 7 December 1956.



He underwent a Medical Examination on 4 January 1957, at which time  it  was
noted that he had been unable to see from the  right  eye  since  birth  and
documented only light perception of the right eye.

He underwent a separation  physical  on  4  February  1960,  and  was  found
qualified for separation and  not  qualified  for  reenlistment.   His  EPTS
amaurotic (blind) right eye condition, with very poor  uncorrectable  visual
acuity 20/2000 was noted.

He was released from active duty and transferred to the  Air  Force  Reserve
on 7 March 1960.  He completed four years of active service.

He was honorably discharged from the Air Force Reserve on 7 March 1962.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

The BCMR  Medical  Consultant  recommends  the  application  be  denied  and
states, in part, that the applicant had an existing prior to service  (EPTS)
eye condition that  was  waived  at  the  time  of  his  enlistment  and  he
completed his four-year term of service receiving  an  honorable  discharge.
His eye condition was noted in  his  enlistment,  periodic,  and  separation
medical examinations, and there was no evidence of service-incurred  injury,
disease or aggravation of his vision.  His separation  physical  noted  that
his visual impairment was disqualifying for reenlistment.   He  provides  no
evidence that he applied to  reenlist  but  was  denied  based  on  his  eye
condition.  However, the Air Force may choose to  waive  certain  conditions
or not depending on its needs at the time and subsequent rejection  for  his
condition would not have represented an impropriety or inequity.  He had  no
medical condition that would have warranted  evaluation  in  the  disability
system.  Medical conditions that exist prior to  service  are  not  eligible
for  disability  compensation  unless  military  service   has   permanently
aggravated the condition beyond the natural progression of the condition.

The BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPD recommends the application be denied.  AFPC/DPPD states, in  part,
that  the  applicant  has  failed  to  provide  medical   documentation   to
substantiate that an injustice occurred during the  period  of  his  release
from active duty that would warrant a change to his records to show that  he
was awarded  a  disability  percentage.   The  applicant  was  approved  for
separation but  not  qualified  for  reenlistment  due  to  his  history  of
blindness in  the  right  eye  since  his  birth.   No  service  aggravation
appeared evident as a result of his military service but  merely  a  natural
progression of his condition.  Had the applicant been referred to a  Medical
Evaluation Board (MEB) for his amblyopic condition,  the  Informal  Physical
Evaluation Board (IPEB) would have  found  his  condition  to  have  existed
prior to his military service, without service aggravation, and  recommended
that he be discharged.

The AFPC/DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

The applicant states that at the time of his enlistment,  his  minor  visual
impairment was noted and it was not until he tried to reenlist, that he  was
told he could not.  He was never advised what RE code 3  meant  or  that  he
had enlisted with a waiver.  While the BCMR Medical Consultant’s  evaluation
states that his visual acuity in 1960 was 20/2000, there  is  no  indication
as to what his visual acuity was at the time of his  enlistment  examination
in 1956.  He states that at the time of his enlistment, he  could  see  more
than just light.

The applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

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.  Sufficient relevant evidence  has  been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of error  or  injustice  to  warrant  correcting  the  applicant’s
records to show that on 7 March 1960, he was not released from active  duty,
but on that date he was separated by reason of physical disability,  with  a
10% rating.  In this respect, a majority of the Board notes that a  6  March
1956 Report of Medical Examination  indicates  that  the  esotropia  of  his
right eye and amblyopia of the left eye were  not  considered  disqualifying
for enlistment; however, his  separation  physical  completed  on  4 January
1960 indicates that he was found not  qualified  for  reenlistment  and  his
EPTS  amaurotic  (blind)  right  eye   condition   was   very   poor,   with
uncorrectable visual acuity 20/2000.  In view of this,  a  majority  of  the
Board finds that the applicant has met his burden of showing that  his  EPTS
eye condition was permanently aggravated by his active duty  service  beyond
the natural progression of the condition.   Therefore,  a  majority  of  the
Board  recommends  the  applicant’s  records  be  corrected  to  the  extent
indicated below.

_________________________________________________________________


THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air  Force  relating
to APPLICANT be corrected to show that:

      a.    On 6 March 1960, he was found 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  was
right amaurotic, mild, VA Diagnostic Code  6099,  rated  at  10%;  that  the
disability may be permanent; that the disability was not due to  intentional
misconduct or willful neglect; that the disability was not  incurred  during
a period of national emergency; and that the disability was not received  in
line of duty as a direct result of armed conflict.

      b.     On  7  March  1960,  he  was  honorably  discharged  under  the
provisions of AFR 35-4, Physical Disability, with entitlement  to  severance
pay.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered  Docket  Number  BC-2002-03941
in Executive Session on 22 May 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                       Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
                       Mr. Laurence M. Groner, Member
                       Ms. Jean A. Reynolds, Member

By majority vote, the Board voted to correct  the  applicant’s  records,  as
recommended.  Mr. Groner voted to deny the application, but  does  not  wish
to submit  a  minority  report.   The  following  documentary  evidence  was
considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 5 Dec 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 6 Mar 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 7 Apr 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Apr 03.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, undated.




                                   RICHARD A. PETERSON
                                   Panel Chair

AFBCMR BC-2002-03941




MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

      Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force
Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section
1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that:

      The pertinent military records of the  Department  of  the  Air  Force
relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that:

            a.   On 6 March 1960, he was found 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 was right amaurotic, mild, VA Diagnostic Code 6099, rated at 10%; that
the disability may be permanent; that the disability was not due to
intentional misconduct or willful neglect; that the disability was not
incurred during a period of national emergency; and that the disability was
not received in line of duty as a direct result of armed conflict.

      b.    On 7 March 1960, he was honorably discharged under the
provisions of AFR 35-4, Physical Disability, with entitlement to severance
pay.









JOE G. LINEBERGER

Director

Air Force Review Boards Agency


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080001914

    Original file (20080001914.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states, in effect, that he was unjustly discharged for defective vision that existed prior to service (EPTS) when in fact he should have been medically retired because he was injured on active duty. The applicant agreed with the boards findings and recommendations on 4 December 1967 and on the same day submitted an application for expeditious discharge by reason of physical disability - EPTS. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140019747

    Original file (20140019747.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The physician's review and analysis of the TSGLI application is summarized below: * the physician thoroughly reviewed the case in the Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA) which contained more medical notes and documents than the applicant submitted in support of his claim * only one eye examination not prior to the claimed traumatic event was recorded in AHLTA, written on 20 August 2007, documenting his hypermetropia (one eye with significantly worse vision than...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001063506C070421

    Original file (2001063506C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 4 January 1996, the applicant underwent a medical evaluation board (MEB). On 16 April 1996, an informal PEB found the applicant to be physically unfit due to probable acute zonal occult outer retinopathy with suspected glaucoma, strabismus, and facial neuralgia, Veterans Affairs Schedule of Rating Disabilities (VASRD) codes 6099 (diseases of the eye, unlisted conditions), 6006 (retinitis), and 6078 (impairment of central visual acuity, vision in one eye 20/100). On 30 October 2001, a...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02321

    Original file (PD-2013-02321.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The eye conditions, characterized as “mild traumatic cataract,” “decreased vision,” and “cystoid macular edema” of the left eye, were forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501.No other conditions were submitted by the MEB.The Informal PEBcombined the MEB diagnoses as a single unfitting condition, rated 10% under criteria of the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). The Board also acknowledges the CI’s information regarding the occupational impediments due to his...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110004450

    Original file (20110004450.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states: * he was released from his unit as a direct result of an injury incurred while he was in a 2-week drill status * he lost vision in his right eye, suffers from headaches, and was awarded a 30 percent rating just for his right eye from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) * the same regulations governing disabilities which are used by the Armed Forces are used by the VA * according to regulations, he should have been medically retired * the attached DA Form 8-118...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0002417

    Original file (0002417.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02417 INDEX CODE: 108.01 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His honorable discharge be changed to reflect medical retirement. The Medical Consultant states that the applicant provided a partial copy of a letter written by his eye doctor that seems to indicate some weight contribution from his...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02670

    Original file (BC-2011-02670.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02670 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her narrative reason for separation be changed to medical/service connected disability. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050018217C070206

    Original file (20050018217C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    His retinitis pigmentosa was determined to be congenital, existing prior to his entrance onto active duty with no aggravation by his military service. The opinion states the applicant's disability processing was proper and the preponderance of evidence did not support the applicant's request. Preponderance of evidence is defined as that degree of proof necessary to fully satisfy the board members that there is greater than a 50% probability that the disease was neither incurred during nor...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-01042

    Original file (PD2011-01042.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) adjudicated the visual field deficit right eye condition as unfitting, rated 30%, and placed the CI on the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL). At the time the CI was placed on the TDRL, the PEB rated the visual field deficit condition at 30% under a combination VASRD code reflecting that an impairment of visual field (code 6080) was possibly due to TB (6010). In the matter of the right eye visual field condition, the Board unanimously recommends a...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01169

    Original file (PD2012 01169.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The keratoconus and sleep apnea conditions, characterized as “keratoconus in each eye corrected with rigid gas permeable contact lenses, EPTS (existed prior to service), not permanently aggravated by service;” and “sleep apnea requiring CPAP,”were forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501 as medically unacceptable.The MEB forwarded no other conditions.The PEBadjudicated “keratoconus in each eye, corrected with rigid gas permeable contact lens, EPTS, not permanently...