RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-03169
            INDEX CODE:  110.00

      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  NONE

      XXXXXXX    HEARING DESIRED: YES

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

It appears applicant is  requesting  her  disability  discharge  be
changed to a medical retirement.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The current law, Title 10, USC, Sections 12731a and b, and 1207a do
not allow her to be eligible for retirement based on her conditions
being found to be in the line of duty.

The USAFR allows retirement at 15 years of service  with  the  last
six years spent  in  a  reserve  component.   She  states  she  was
eligible for this until 10 USC 12731a and b were established.

In support of her appeal, applicant submitted a  copy  of  AF  Form
356,  Findings  and  Recommended  Disposition  of   USAF   Physical
Evaluation Board, and excerpts from Title 10, USC, 12731a and b.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Prior to the events under review, applicant served on  active  duty
from 7 Oct 87 to 17 Mar 96.   She  transferred  to  the  Air  Force
Reserve on 18 Mar 96, and reenlisted on 9 Jan 00, for a  period  of
four years in the grade of master sergeant.

Applicant was recalled to extended active duty (EAD) on 21 Sep  01,
for a period of 24 months.  While  on  EAD,  a  medical  evaluation
board (MEB) evaluated the applicant on 17 Jun 03, and referred  the
results to the  Informal  Physical  Evaluation  Board  (IPEB).   On
7 Jul 03, the IPEB recommended discharge with severance pay  and  a
10 percent disability rating based on a diagnosis  of  non-specific
ulcerative colitis associated with irritable bowel syndrome.

On 11 Jul 03, the Special Assistant to the  Secretary  of  the  Air
Force Personnel Council determined applicant was  physically  unfit
for  continued  military  service  and  directed   discharge   with
severance pay under the provisions of Title 10, USC, 1203,  with  a
discharge effective date of 25 Aug 03.

On 25 Aug 03, applicant was released from active duty and honorably
discharged from the Air Force Reserve with disability severance pay
in the grade of master sergeant with a compensable  percentage  for
physical disability of 10 percent.  She completed  12.56  years  of
service under Title 10, USC, Section 1208.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFRC/DPM  reviewed  this  application  and  recommended  denial.
Applicant’s disability case does not meet the  requirement  of  10,
USC, Sections 12731b and 1201 for retirement.

DPM states applicant is  correct  that  Title  10,  USC,  12731b  -
Special Rule for Members with Physical Disabilities not Incurred in
Line of Duty, does not allow for early retirement if the  medically
disqualifying condition was incurred in the line of duty.  Nor does
applicant qualify for  retirement  under  Title  10,  USC,  1201  -
Regulars and  Members  on  Active  Duty  for  more  than  30  days:
Retirements, because the USAF Physical Evaluation Board  (PEB)  did
not rate the applicant with  at  least  a  30  percent  compensable
disability percentage.  She was rated at 10 percent.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

HQ AFPC/DPPD reviewed this application and recommended denial.  The
purpose of the military disability evaluation system  (DES)  is  to
maintain a fit and vital force by separating  or  retiring  members
who are unable to perform the duties of their office,  grade,  rank
or rating.  Members who are separated or retired  by  reason  of  a
physical  disability  may  be  eligible  for   certain   disability
compensation.

Disability processing records reveal  a  Medical  Evaluation  Board
(MEB) was initiated on 17 Jun 03, and the results was  referred  to
the Informal Physical  Evaluation  Board  (IPEB)  which  ultimately
recommended  she  be  discharged  with  entitlement  to  disability
severance pay with  a  10  percent  disability  rating.   Applicant
agreed with the Board’s findings and officials within the Office of
the Secretary of the Air Force  directed  she  be  discharged  with
severance pay with a 10 percent  disability  rating.   Because  her
disability rating was rated less than 30 percent disabling, she was
not eligible for a disability retirement  under  the  provision  of
Title 10, USC, Section 1201.

Applicant’s  reference  to  Title  10,  USC,  Section   1207,   was
overlooked since this refers to  a  disability  received  from  the
result of intentional misconduct or willful neglect, which  is  not
the case.

Based on  a  review  of  the  disability  processing  records  they
concluded the service member was treated fairly throughout the  DES
process, and that she was properly rated under disability laws  and
policy at the time of her medical discharge.

A complete copy of the 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 Feb 04 for review and comment within  30  days.   As  of  this
date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit E).

___________________________________________________________________

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 found no evidence which would lead us to  believe
that  the  applicant's  disability   processing   and   the   final
disposition of her case were in error or contrary to the  governing
Air Force instructions, which implement the law.  In  addition,  we
note  that  on  11  Jul  03,  she  agreed  with  the  findings  and
recommendation of the Informal Physical  Evaluation  Board  (IPEB).
The  appropriate  Air  Force  offices  have  addressed  the  issues
presented by the applicant and  we  are  in  agreement  with  their
opinions and recommendations.  Therefore, we adopt their  rationale
as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the
victim of an error or injustice.

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 AFBCMR Docket  Number
BC-2003-03169 in Executive Session on  29  April  2004,  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Jackson A. Hauslein Jr., Panel Chair
      Mr. James W. Russell III, Member
      Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 4 Jul 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFRC/DPM, dated 29 Oct 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPD, dated 26 Jan 04.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Feb 04.




                                   JACKSON A. HAUSLEIN JR.
                                   Panel Chair