RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-03437
                                       INDEX CODE:  108.00
      XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX                   COUNSEL: NONE

      XXXXXXXXXX                        HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her military records be corrected to show she was placed  on  the  Temporary
Disability  Retirement  List  (TDRL)  or  she  be  permanently  retired  for
physical disability with a rating of  at  least  30%,  her  grade  of  staff
sergeant (E-5) be restored, and she be awarded back pay  and  benefits  back
to her date of release from active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She was deprived of her right to a full and fair hearing as contemplated  by
the statute, Title  10,  United  States  Code  (USC),  Section  1214.   Upon
receiving the results of her Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB),  she
was improperly advised by the Wilford Hall Medical Center  staff  concerning
her rights and responsibilities.  She was never  advised  of  her  right  to
request a Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB).   She  was  advised  that
the IPEB results were final and that she was required to sign the Air  Force
Form 1180 accepting them.

In support of her application, the applicant provides her  counsel’s  brief,
and  copies  of  her  service  medical  records;  correspondence  from   the
Department of  Veterans  Affairs  (DVA),  and  documentation  of  award  and
personal  appreciation  contesting  to  the  applicant’s   character.    The
applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

On 16 October 2003, prior to the Air Force  advisories  being  written,  the
applicant’s counsel wrote the Board withdrawing from  the  applicant’s  case
and requesting the Air Force advisories be forwarded to the applicant.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 3 February 1986, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force  at  the
age of 18 in the grade of airman basic (E-1) for a  period  of  four  years.
After completing basic training, the applicant was trained  as  a  personnel
specialist; however, in 1990  she  cross-trained  into  the  Cardiopulmonary
Laboratory Journeyman career field.  She was progressively promoted  to  the
grade of staff sergeant (E-5) with a date of rank of 1 September 1996.

In February 1994, the applicant underwent an  arthroscopy  stemming  from  a
knee  injury,  sustained  in  February  1994.   On  6  Ocotber   1998,   the
applicant’s  records  met  a  Medical  Evaluation  Board  (MEB).   The   MEB
determined the applicant suffered  from  chronic  left  knee  patellofemoral
arthralgia, and that it was incurred while entitled to basic pay.   The  MEB
recommended she be continued on active duty and referred her records to  the
IPEB for evaluation.  A statement  from  the  applicant’s  commander,  dated
14 October 1998, indicated the  applicant  was  capable  of  performing  all
duties without restriction and noted that even though  her  job  performance
had been  satisfactory,  her  numerous  medical  appointments  hindered  her
performance.  Her commander continued to state that if it were not  for  her
physical profile, she would be capable of worldwide deployment.

The IPEB’s findings, dated 28 October 1998, stated the applicant  was  unfit
because of physical disability, her disability was incurred in the  line  of
duty,  and  the  degree  of  impairment  might  be  permanent.    The   IPEB
recommended the applicant be  discharged  with  severance  pay  with  a  ten
percent disability rating.

On  13  November  1998,  the  applicant  agreed  with   the   findings   and
recommendation of the board and  consequently,  on  20  November  1998,  the
Secretary of the Air Force approved the IPEB’s findings  and  directed  that
the applicant be separated  from  active  service  for  physical  disability
under the provisions of 10 USC 1203, with severance pay.

On 19 January 1999, the applicant was separated with an honorable  discharge
effective under Air Force Instruction 36-3212, with a narrative  reason  for
separation as disability,  severance  pay.   She  had  served  12  years,  5
months, and 15 days on active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant  is  of  the  opinion  that  no  change  in  the
applicant’s records is warranted.  The BCMR Medical Consultant  states  that
the applicant was disability discharged with severance  pay  for  left  knee
patellofemoral pain syndrome (patellofemoral arthralia).   Evidence  of  the
record shows that the applicant continued to perform her military duties  in
an exemplary fashion except she was unable to perform the Air Force  aerobic
test (cycle ergometry); had exceeded Air Force weight standards;  and  could
not  deploy,  an  increasingly  important  tasking  of  Air  Force   medical
personnel, particularly critical care specialties  such  as  cardiopulmonary
technicians.  The IPEB properly  determined  she  was  unfit  for  continued
military service and properly rated her knee condition.  The  DVA  has  also
similarly rated her knee condition at ten percent as  of  four  years  after
the  IPEB  rating.   The  applicant  concurred   with   the   findings   and
recommendation of the IPEB.  Although the applicant had a variety  of  other
medical problems, none were unfitting at the time she was evaluated  in  the
Disability Evaluation System (DES) for her knee pain.  The mere presence  of
a medical condition does not qualify a  member  for  disability  evaluation.
For an individual to be considered unfit for military service,  the  medical
condition must prevent  performance  of  work  commensurate  with  rank  and
experience.  The BCMR Medical Consultant is of the opinion that  action  and
disposition in this case were proper  and  equitable  reflecting  compliance
with Air  Force  directives  that  implement  the  law.   The  BCMR  Medical
Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPD recommends denial of the applicant’s request.   DPPD  states  that
the preponderance of evidence,  other  than  her  own  testimony,  does  not
indicate an injustice occurred at the time of her disability  processing  to
show she was denied her right to appear before the FPEB.  This is  indicated
on the AF Form 1180, signed by the applicant  herself,  which  clearly  gave
her three options on the election form.  It is the opinion of DPPD that  the
applicant was treated  fairly  throughout  the  DES  process  and,  she  was
properly rated under Federal disability guidelines as required  by  military
laws  and  policy  in  effect  at  the  time  of   her   evaluation.    DPPD
wholeheartedly agrees with the comments and  recommendation  from  the  BCMR
Medical Consultant.  The DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

In her response to the Air Force evaluations, the applicant  stated  she  is
very bothered by the Air Force advisories.  Since  her  departure  from  the
military, she feels she was given a bad deal.  She lives with daily pain  in
her knee.  She is not sure why she was not properly advised on her  options;
however, she does know that she did not sign in the  block  concurring  with
the IPEB’s findings and her  subsequent  release  from  the  military.   The
applicant’s rebuttal 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.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of an error or injustice.   We  took  notice  of  the  applicant's
complete submission in judging the merits of the case and do not  find  that
it supports a determination that  the  applicant  was  improperly  separated
from active duty in 1999.  An IPEB found the applicant unfit  for  continued
military service and recommended she be discharged with severance  pay  with
a ten percent disability  rating  for  her  knee  condition.   We  note  the
applicant signed an Air Force Form 1180 concurring with the findings of  the
IPEB, and accepted $43,466.40 in severance pay.  In view of  the  above  and
absent persuasive evidence that the applicant was  denied  rights  to  which
entitled,  appropriate  regulations  were  not  followed,   or   appropriate
standards were not applied, we agree with the opinions  and  recommendations
of the Air Force advisories and adopt their conclusions as our  findings  in
the  case.   Accordingly,  the  applicant’s   request   is   not   favorably
considered.

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 this application in  Executive
Session on 11 August 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
                 Ms. Martha J. Evans, Member
                 Ms. Martha A. Maust, Member

The following documentary evidence for AFBCMR  Docket  Number  BC-2003-03437
was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 9 Oct 03, with atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 3 Mar 04.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 21 Apr 04.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Apr 04.
    Exhibit F.  Applicant’s Rebuttal, undated.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Chair