RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02406
INDEX NUMBER: 145.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be given a medical retirement.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He had an injury which occurred while on active duty. He is unable to work
and has no income.
In support of his application, the applicant provides copies of
correspondence and documents relating to his Formal Physical Evaluation
Board (FPEB), Informal PEB and Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). Applicant’s
complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Effective 2 June 2004, applicant was assigned to the Retired Reserve
Section awaiting Retired pay at age 60 (10 August 2012). His assignment to
the Retired Reserve Section was in the grade of master sergeant with a date
of rank of 1 March 2000. He was credited with 31 years, 9 months and 25
days of satisfactory Federal service.
Based on the applicant’s condition of pain in the right side of his heel
and ankle while on extended active duty from 9 April 2002 to 25 August
2002, a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) was convened to consider his case.
The MEB rendered diagnoses of right foot and ankle pain. On 12 December
2003 and 4 March 2004, a Physical Evaluation Board was convened to consider
his case. Under Category I, the board found the applicant possessed no
unfitting conditions which were compensable and ratable. Under Category II
(conditions that could be unfitting but were not currently compensable or
ratable), the board rendered a diagnosis of “Chronic Right Plantar
Fasciitis Causing Right Foot/Ankle Pain, 10 Disability Rating/NA.” Under
Category III, (Conditions that are not separately unfitting and not
compensable or ratable), the board rendered a diagnosis of “Obesity.”
The board found the applicant was unfit because of a disability not
incurred while entitled to receive basic pay. The board recommended he be
discharged under other than Chapter 61, Title 10. On 14 March 2004, the
applicant disagreed with the findings and recommendations of the FPEB and
contended that the FPEB quotes regulations without considering human
factors. On 29 April 2004, the Secretary of the Air Force directed that
the applicant be administratively discharged under other than Chapter 61,
Title 10, confirming the finding “not in line of duty”; existed prior to
service without service aggravation.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:
AFPC/DPPD recommends the application be denied. Based upon review of the
disability processing records and supporting documentation, AFPC/DPPD
states that the applicant was treated fairly throughout the MEB and PEB
process and determines that no injustice or error occurred. The AFPC/DPPD
evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:
On 20 August 2004, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was sent to the
applicant for review and comment. As of this date, this office has not
received a response.
_________________________________________________________________
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 error or injustice. The applicant's complete submission was
thoroughly reviewed and his contentions were duly noted. However, we do
not find the documentation presented sufficiently persuasive to warrant a
change in his records. We do not dispute the circumstances of his medical
condition; however, it appears the applicant’s medical case was properly
evaluated under the appropriate Air Force regulations, which implement the
law. Other than his own assertions, the applicant has provided no evidence
that would lead us to believe the assessment of his medical condition and
the determination that his condition existed prior to service were based on
factors other than accepted medical principles. Therefore, we have no
basis to conclude that the applicant's treatment while in and discharge
from the Air Force Reserve was improper. We are sympathetic to the
applicant’s situation and recommend he pursue the Department of Veterans
Affairs disability system for appropriate care and benefits. In view of
the above, we have no basis to favorably consider the applicant's request.
_________________________________________________________________
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 14 October 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
Mr. John B. Hennessey, Member
Mr. Alan A. Blomgren, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered for AFBCMR Docket Number
04-02406:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 28 Jul 04, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 9 Aug 04.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 Aug 04.
THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03487
The IPEB recommended the applicant be discharged with severance pay with a disability rating of 20%; because of his unfitting, ratable, and compensable condition; in accordance with DoD and Veterans Administration Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) guidelines. _________________________________________________________________ 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’s...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03095
On 6 March 2000, the applicant submitted her rebuttal letter to SAFPC requesting a disability retirement, with a compensable disability rating of 40 percent. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: The BCMR Medical Consultant summarized the information contained in the applicant’s personnel and medical records and is of the opinion that the preponderance of the evidence of the record supports a disability rating of 20 percent. A complete...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00811
On 15 August 2005, a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) reviewed the applicant’s records and referred the applicant’s case to an IPEB for further evaluation. The IPEB findings stated the applicant’s condition did not prevent her from reasonably performing her duties of her office, grade, rank, or rating; nor did it interfere with her day-to-day duties. On 18 December 2006, the applicant submitted a hardship request for a 9-12 month extension to allow surgery for both ankles and recuperation time.
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2011-05034
Following a review of all available facts and evidence in the case, to include the testimony presented before the FPEB, the remarks by 2 the FPEB, IPEB, the service medical record, and the narrative summary of the MEB, the board concurred with the disposition recommended by the two previous boards and recommended discharge with severance pay with a combined disability rating of 20 percent. DPSD states no documentation was provided at any time during the DES processing of the applicant’s...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03621
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His AF Form 356, Findings and Recommended Disposition of USAF Physical Evaluation Board, line 10(b) is marked YES, as the disability did occur during a time of war in the line of duty. What the Air Force is telling him is that in no way an Air Force member can have a combat-related injury if they were medically retired and entered the Air Force prior to the date indicated on the form. DPPD states the...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-00545
After the review the IPEB determined his PTSD rendered him unfit for further service and recommended he be placed on the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) with a compensable percentage of 50 percent. The applicant did not concur with the findings and recommended disposition of the IPEB and requested a formal PEB (FPEB). The Medical Consultant states the preponderance of the record supports the PEB rating of 50 percent for his PTSD.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-01241
On 17 Jun 87, the Air Force PEB recommended he be permanently retired from the Air Force with a combined disability rating of 40%. His records show documented evidence that he had complained of back pain as early as 1963, two years prior to being in Thailand. The DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant reiterates his account of the incident in which he was injured, provides...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2001-03585A
_________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPD states, in part, that the findings and recommendation of the FPEB along with the applicant’s rebuttal for a permanent retirement were forwarded to the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) for adjudication and SAFPC recommended that she be removed from the TDRL and permanently retired with a 60% rating. However, after a thorough review of the evidence of record and...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01696
On 26 Oct 77, the applicant disagreed with the findings and recommendations of the FPEB. Air Force disability boards can only rate unfitting medical conditions based upon the individual’s medical status at the actual time of the evaluation board. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In his response to the Air Force evaluation, applicant states that he disagrees with the...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00971
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00971 INDEX CODE: 124.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 30 SEP 07 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her burn injuries to her upper and lower back be reflected on the AF Form 356, Findings and Recommended Disposition of USAF Information Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB), dated 15 July 2004. ...