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
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080001914
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
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
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
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
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...
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
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
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
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
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...