RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00154

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her discharge be changed to in the line of duty (LOD).

_________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The formal LOD determination regarding her  injuries  incurred  on  5 August
2001 should be changed to in the line of duty because she  had  a  pituitary
tumor that was hemorrhaging and she could have easily died.

The applicant states that the reason for her discharge is inequitable  since
she served two and a half years on active duty and her  pituitary  condition
is service-connected.  In addition, her medical  records  contain  a  letter
from  the  neuro-surgeon  that  performed  her  surgery  stating  that   her
condition could not have been known and that her accident did not cause  the
tumor.

In support of the appeal, the applicant submits a copy of  a  Department  of
Veterans Affairs (DVA) rating decision awarding her a  combined  compensable
disability rating of 50%.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 12 January  2000,  for  a
period of six years.

She was involved in an automobile accident on 5 August 2001.

She reported to the clinic at Eglin  AFB  on  9,  14  and  31  August  2001,
complaining of a headaches and neck pain.



The commander notified her on 15  August  1991,  of  his  intent  to  impose
nonjudicial punishment under Article 15 of  the  Uniform  Code  of  Military
Justice (UCMJ) for violating Article 92 (i.e., failure to obey an  order  or
regulation).  Specifically, for failing to report back  to  the  local  area
prior to the  expiration  of  the  last  day  of  chargeable  leave.   After
consulting legal counsel, she waived her right to a trial  by  court-martial
and accepted the nonjudicial  punishment.   After  considering  her  written
submission, on 17 August 2001, the commander determined that she did  commit
the  alleged  offense  and  imposed  nonjudicial  punishment  consisting  of
reduction to the grade of airman, and 30 days of extra  duty.  However,  the
grade reduction was suspended until 16  February  2002,  at  which  time  it
would be remitted without further action, unless sooner  vacated.   She  did
not appeal the punishment.

Based on her complaints of massive headaches, she was admitted to the  Eglin
AFB hospital on 7 September 2001, at which time a Computed Axial  Tomography
(CAT) scan showed findings consistent with a pituitary hemorrhage.  She  was
referred for specialty care at the  local  civilian  medical  center  and  a
Magnetic Resonance Image (MRI) confirmed a pituitary  hemorrhage.   She  was
transferred  to  Fort  Walton  Beach  Medical   Center   and   underwent   a
transphenoidal   resection   of   her   pituitary   gland.     During    her
hospitalization, she developed diabetes insipidus and hypopituitarism.

She underwent  endocrinology  evaluation  and  based  on  the  diagnoses  of
pituitary  apoplexy  with  resultant  central  hypothyroidism  and  diabetes
insipidus, she was referred to  a  Medical  Evaluation  Board  (MEB)  on  12
October 2001.  The MEB concluded she was  not  fit  for  continued  military
service due to her condition and  referred  her  to  a  Physical  Evaluation
Board (PEB).

The commander notified her on 29  October  2001,  that  he  was  considering
whether to vacate the  suspension  of  the  grade  reduction  based  on  her
violation of Article 92.  Specifically, that on 17 October 2001, she  failed
to report to the training room for verbal counseling, and failed  to  assist
SSgt C--- and SrA F---  by  remaining  inside  a  government  vehicle.   She
consulted legal  counsel,  and  submitted  a  written  presentation  to  the
commander.   After  reviewing  her  written  presentation,   the   commander
determined  that  she  did  commit  the  alleged  offense  and  vacated  the
suspended grade reduction, reducing her to the grade of airman, with a  date
of rank (DOR) of 17 August 2001.

A Line of Duty  (LOD)  investigation  was  completed  on  11  January  2002,
determining  that  her  injuries,  i.e.,  headaches,  pituitary  hemorrhage,
sustained as a result of the 5 August 2001 automobile accident were  not  in
line of duty -  not  due  to  own  misconduct.   The  investigating  officer
further concluded that at the  time  of  the  accident,  the  applicant  was
absent without authority (AWOL); that the accident  was  the  cause  of  her
injuries; and  that  the  accident  was  not  due  to  gross  negligence  or
intentional misconduct on her part.  The reviewing  authority  approved  the
findings on 30 January 2002.

An Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) convened on  11 February  2002,
and based on the diagnoses of pituitary apoplexy with sequelae, status  post
transphenoidal   resection   of   pituitary:    diabetes    insipidus    and
hypothyroidism, found her unfit to perform her duties  and  recommended  she
be discharged.  The IPEB noted  that  since  her  medical  condition  was  a
result of an accident (injury) that was determined to be not in the line  of
duty, her medical condition was not  compensable  under  the  provisions  of
military disability law/policy.  She did not agree  with  the  findings  and
recommendations of the IPEB  and  requested  a  Formal  Physical  Evaluation
Board (FPEB).

An FPEB convened on 12 March 2002, and based on the diagnoses  of  pituitary
apoplexy with sequelae, status post transphenoidal  resection  of  pituitary
and diabetes insipidus, VASRD  7909,  recommended  she  be  discharged  with
severance pay, with a 0% rating.  The FPEB  also  found  her  hypothyroidism
unfitting but not compensable or ratable.  The FPEB  noted  that  there  was
enough evidence (i.e., behavioral changes, large size of  tumor,  and  small
amount of bleed into pituitary) that her medical condition was  sufficiently
separate from the accident, and her case was referred to  the  Secretary  of
the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC).

On 9 May 2002, the SAFPC confirmed the findings  of  the  LOD  determination
that she was unfit for military service  by  reason  of  injuries  sustained
during a period of unauthorized absence from duty, and directed that she  be
discharged.  The SAFPC considered the comments of the FPEB  suggesting  that
her medical condition may have been unrelated to  her  automobile  accident,
but noted  that  the  preponderance  of  the  evidence  suggested  that  her
pituitary hemorrhage,  which  required  surgical  removal,  was  the  direct
result of a closed head trauma incident  from  a  high-speed  motor  vehicle
accident that occurred during a period of unauthorized absence.   The  SAFPC
found no compelling arguments that would support either the reversal of  the
LOD determination or the disassociation of her medical  condition  with  her
automobile accident.

On 24 June 2002, she was honorably discharged under the  provisions  of  AFI
36-3212 (Disability, Not in  Line  of  Duty).   She  completed  2  years,  5
months, and 13 days of active service.

On 26 November 2002, the DVA awarded her a combined  compensable  disability
rating of 50% (headaches - 30%; diabetes insipidus, residuals  of  pituitary
resection - 20%; hypothyroidism, also  claimed  as  hypopituitarism  -  10%;
maxillary sinusitis - 0%; hemorrhoids - 0%; cervical spine strain - 0%;  and
right ear keloid with scarring - 0%), retroactive to 25 June 2002.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

AFPC/JA recommends the application be denied and states, in part,  that  for
compensability purposes, a LOD determination is  required  by  statute.   An
injury, disease, or death is presumed to have  been  in  the  line  of  duty
unless a preponderance of the evidence  demonstrates  that  the  member  was
AWOL or that the disability or death was proximately caused by the  member’s
own misconduct.   Even  if  the  applicant’s  tumor  existed  prior  to  the
accident, there is a preponderance of evidence  that  supports  the  finding
that the accident caused the hemorrhaging of the tumor.   She  has  provided
no evidence that  had  the  accident  not  occurred  her  tumor  would  have
hemorrhaged on its own, causing her development of diabetes, insipidus,  and
hyperthyroidism.  To the contrary, her medical records do not indicate  that
she was suffering from any  of  the  headaches  she  experienced  after  the
accident.  From all indications, but for the accident that caused the  tumor
to hemorrhage, she could have gone on for years without even knowing of  the
tumor.  Furthermore, an injury incurred  during  a  period  of  unauthorized
absence, is appropriately determined to have been incurred not in  the  line
of duty, not  due  to  own  misconduct.   In  her  case,  although  the  LOD
investigating  officer  determined  the  accident  caused   her   tumor   to
hemorrhage, she was AWOL at the time of the accident.  She also argues  that
based on the DVA determination that she had a service-connected  disability,
the Air Force should have disability retired her; however, the fact the  DVA
will compensate her under its disability program does  not  effect  the  Air
Force’s determination.

The AFPC/JA evaluation is at Exhibit C.

The BCMR Medical Consultant concurs with the findings and recommendation  of
the FPEB, finding her unfit due to a  condition  incurred  in  the  line  of
duty, with a 0% rating.  The BCMR Medical Consultant states, in  part,  that
the preponderance of  the  evidence  does  not  support  that  the  headache
immediately following the  accident  was  due  to  pituitary  apoplexy,  but
rather the pituitary bleeding that led to  surgery  and  the  post-operative
sequelae of diabetes insipidus and hypothyroidism.  It cannot  be  concluded
that the acute 7 September 2001 headache one month after the accident was  a
direct result of the  accident.   It  is  more  likely  that  the  pituitary
hemorrhage was  a  spontaneously  occurring  event  related  solely  to  her
pituitary tumor.  Her hypothyroidism and headaches were not  unfitting.   In
addition, while her diabetes insipidus rendered  her  unfit,  based  on  the
medical documentation and  her  FPEB  testimony,  it  did  not  support  the
minimum rating of 20% in the VASRD.

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




AFPC/DPPD recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that  no
errors occurred during her  processing  through  the  Air  Force  disability
evaluation system.  The formal LOD investigation revealed that  it  was  the
second time she was out of her authorized area when her  leave  ended.   She
had been previously counseled on the leave policy.  Only  the  Secretary  of
the Air Force (SAF) or an SAF designated representative  has  the  authority
to reverse LOD determinations made under  AFI  36-2910.   The  PEB  may  not
recommend a  change  to  an  LOD  determination  unless  there  is  new  and
compelling  evidence  not  considered   during   the   disability   process.
AFPC/DPPD  agrees  with  the  LOD  determination  and  believe   the   final
disposition of her disability  case  to  be  fair  and  in  accordance  with
military laws and policy in effect at the time of her discharge.

The AFPC/DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

Complete  copies  of  the  Air  Force  evaluations  were  forwarded  to  the
applicant on 18 July 2003 for review and response within 30 days.   However,
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 timely filed.

3.  Sufficient relevant evidence  has  been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of error  or  injustice  to  warrant  correcting  the  applicant’s
records to reflect that she was discharged under the provisions of  AFI  36-
3212, Physical Disability, with  entitlement  to  severance  pay.   In  this
respect, we note that the BCMR Medical  Consultant  has  indicated  that  it
cannot be concluded that the applicant’s acute headache one month after  her
automobile accident was a direct result of the  accident,  and  that  it  is
more likely that the pituitary  hemorrhage  was  a  spontaneously  occurring
event related solely to her pituitary tumor.  In view  of  this,  we  concur
with the findings and recommendation of the FPEB, finding her unfit  due  to
a condition incurred  in  the  line  of  duty,  with  a  0%  rating.     The
applicant contends that based on  the  DVA  determination  that  she  had  a
service-connected disability, she should have been disability  retired  from
the Air Force; however, the fact the  DVA  will  compensate  her  under  its
disability program does not effect the Air Force’s determination.   Although
the Air Force is required to rate disabilities in accordance  with  the  DVA
Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD), the DVA operates under  a  totally
separate system with a different statutory basis.  The  DVA  rates  for  any
and all service connected conditions; to  the  degree  they  interfere  with
future employability, without consideration of  fitness.   Whereas  the  Air
Force rates a member's  disability  at  the  time  of  separation.   In  the
applicant's  case,  the  Air  Force  considered  her   hypothyroidism,   and
headaches and did not find them unfitting.   While  her  diabetes  insipidus
rendered her unfit, the minimum rating of 20% in the VASRD was not  support.
 Therefore, we recommend 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 on 24 June 2002,  she  was  honorably
discharged under the provisions of AFI 36-3212,  Physical  Disability,  with
entitlement to severance pay.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered  Docket  Number  BC-2003-00154
in Executive Session on 23 September 2003, under the provisions of  AFI  36-
2603:

                       Mr. John L. Robuck, Panel Chair
                       Mr. James W. Russell, III, Member
                       Mr. Jay H. Jordon, Member

All members voted to correct the records,  as  recommended.   The  following
documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 2 Feb 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/JA, dated 28 Mar 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 3 Jun 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 10 Jul 03.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Jul 03.




                                   JOHN L. ROBUCK
                                   Panel Chair

AFBCMR BC-2003-00154




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 on 24 June 2002, she was
honorably discharged under the provisions of AFI 36-3212, Physical
Disability, with entitlement to severance pay.








JOE G. LINEBERGER

Director

Air Force Review Boards Agency