Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2001-03145B
Original file (BC-2001-03145B.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                        SECOND ADDENDUM TO
                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2001-03145
            INDEX CODE:  128.14

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  YES

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  13 Jun 06

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her records be corrected to reflect her entitlement to  incapacitation
pay for the period from 1 Nov 98 to 30 Sep 03.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 6 Jun 02, the Board considered an  application  pertaining  to  the
applicant, in which she requested that her records be  reevaluated  to
determine whether she was  wrongfully  discharged  and  denied  future
employment in the military.  The  offices  of  primary  responsibility
(OPRs) recommended that the applicant receive a medical examination to
determine her medical status at the time of her discharge.  The  Board
agreed with the OPRs' recommendation and directed that  the  applicant
undergo a physical examination and review by  the  Medical  Evaluation
Board (MEB), the  Physical  Evaluation  Board  (PEB)  and  the  Formal
Physical Evaluation Board  (FPEB),  if  necessary,  to  determine  her
medical condition as of the date of her discharge.  A complete copy of
the Memorandum for the Chief of Staff, with attachments, is at Exhibit
H.

On 17 Sep 02, an MEB convened and established a diagnosis of a History
of Myofascial Pain Syndrome in  1998,  presently  normal  examination.
The MEB recommended that  the  applicant’s  case  be  referred  to  an
Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB).

On 1 Oct 02, an IPEB convened and established a diagnosis of a History
of Myofascial Lumbar Pain.  The IPEB  found  that  the  applicant  was
unfit because of physical disability,  and  that  the  disability  was
ratable under VA Diagnostic Code 5290  at  10 percent,  and  that  the
disability may be permanent.  The IPEB recommended that the  applicant
be discharged with severance pay.

On  30  Oct  02,  the  applicant  disagreed  with  the  findings   and
recommended disposition of the IPEB and demanded a formal  hearing  of
the case.

On 14 Nov 02, an FPEB  convened  and  established  a  diagnosis  of  a
History of Myofascial Lumbar Pain.  The FPEB found that the  condition
was unfitting but was not compensable or ratable.  The FPEB found that
the applicant was fit for return to duty.  The applicant  agreed  with
the findings and recommended disposition of the FPEB.

On 26 Aug 03, the Board considered an application  pertaining  to  the
applicant, in which she requested that her  records  be  corrected  to
allow her the option of returning  to  military  service.   The  Board
indicated that since she had been found fit  for  military  duty,  she
should be afforded the opportunity  to  return  to  military  service.
Accordingly, the Board recommended that her  reenlistment  eligibility
(RE) code be changed, which was accepted by the  Director,  Air  Force
Review Boards Agency on 30 Sep 03.  A complete copy of the  Memorandum
for the Chief of Staff, with attachments, is at Exhibit I.

By application, dated 20 Nov  04,  the  applicant  requests  that  her
records be corrected to reflect her entitlement to incapacitation  pay
for the period from 1 Nov 98 to 30 Sep 03.  Because she was denied the
option to reenlist as a result of her improper discharge, she believes
she is entitled to incapacitation pay from the time of  her  discharge
in Nov 98 to the correction of her records by the Board in Sep 03.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit J.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFRC/DPMB recommended denial indicating that since  the  applicant  is
entitled to be returned to the Air Force Reserve without any  physical
limitations and was considered qualified to perform  her  duty  during
the period in question, she would not be  entitled  to  incapacitation
pay.

A complete copy of the AFRC/DPMB evaluation is at Exhibit K.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 4 Apr
05 for review and response.  As of this date,  no  response  has  been
received by this office (Exhibit L).

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  After a thorough review of  this  case,  we  find  that  there  is
insufficient evidence to warrant any corrective action  regarding  the
applicant’s request for incapacitation pay for the period 1 Nov 98  to
30 Sep 03.  We note that based on the recommendations of the Air Force
offices of primary responsibility (OPRs),  the  Board  had  previously
determined the applicant should be evaluated to ascertain her  medical
condition at the time of her involuntary discharge on 1 Nov  98.   She
was ultimately found to have been fit for return to duty, as of 1  Nov
98, by the FPEB after  she  successfully  appealed  the  IPEB  initial
finding  of  unfitness.   As  a  result,  and  based  on  the  Medical
Consultant’s recommendation, the Board  determined  that  her  records
should be corrected to allow her the opportunity to return to military
service.  In view of the foregoing, we find the applicant’s  assertion
she is entitled to incapacitation pay for the period in question to be
inconsistent with the finding she was fit for return to military duty.
 Accordingly, we find no basis to act  favorably  on  the  applicant’s
request.

2.  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 21 Jun 05, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Wayne R. Gracie, Panel Chair
      Ms. Sharon B. Seymour, Member
      Mr. Grover L. Dunn, Member

The following additional documentary  evidence  pertaining  to  AFBCMR
Docket Number BC-2001-03145 was considered:

    Exhibit H.  Memorandum for Chief of Staff, dated 25 Jan 01,
                w/atchs.
    Exhibit I.  Memorandum for Chief of Staff, dated 30 Sep 03,
                w/atchs.
    Exhibit J.  DD Form 149, dated 20 Nov 04, w/atchs.
    Exhibit K.  Letter, AFRC/DPMB, dated 30 Mar 05.
    Exhibit L.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Apr 05.





                                   WAYNE R. GRACIE
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2001-03145A

    Original file (BC-2001-03145A.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board agreed with the OPRs' recommendation and directed that the applicant undergo a physical examination and review by the Medical Evaluation Board (MEB), the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) and the Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB), if necessary, to determine her medical condition as of the date of her discharge. A complete copy of the Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C. SAF/MRBP indicated that they considered all of the evidence and testimony presented before the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-04051

    Original file (BC-2002-04051.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    A 3 Dec 99 ice test conducted by a civilian provider concluded that her history of hives was resolved and there was no evidence of urticaria. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant responded with a personal statement and a letter from her primary care physician, a captain at McConnell AFB, KS. However, since the AFBCMR Medical Consultant advises that this...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2001-00295

    Original file (BC-2001-00295.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant’s rebuttal, with attachments, is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, General Law Division, HQ USAF/JAG, noted that Section 2005 provides for recoupment if a member fails to complete the ADSC voluntarily or due to misconduct. On 14 Aug 01, DFAS-POCC/DE advised the applicant that, based on her placement on the TDRL, it was inappropriate at this time to recoup monies which might not be owed if...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-00342

    Original file (BC-2005-00342.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Between 1998 and 2001 prior to his activation, his civilian physicians had treated his Anxiety Disorder with various medications. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFRC/DPM recommends granting Item A by awarding the applicant 10 active duty pay and points for the 1-10 Feb 04 TDY to Lackland AFB, TX, because he should have been on active duty orders at that time. Based on the available documentation, the Consultant concludes the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01398

    Original file (BC 2013 01398.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    A complete copy of the AFPC/DPFD evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The IPEB noted she was pending surgery and granted her a 30 percent disability rating. However, at the time of the TDRL reevaluation, the applicant had not had the surgery and her physicians at the time were no longer recommending surgery. A complete copy of the AFBCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation, with attachments, is...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01272

    Original file (BC-2011-01272.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: While serving on extended active duty (EAD), she was injured and involuntarily released from active duty prior to her medical condition being resolved. ________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFRC/A1PS recommends denial, stating, in part, at this time there is no documentation provided showing the applicant was unable to perform ~military duties...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 9903103

    Original file (9903103.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The decisions of the Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB), dated 29 Jan 98, and the decision of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAF/PC), dated 3 Apr 98, are contrary to law and regulation and violate “minimum concepts of basic fairness.” When all the evidence is considered, the Board should reach the decision that she is unfit for further military service and should be permanently retired, with...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-00064

    Original file (BC-2009-00064.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board further noted that after the applicant’s injury in Germany, he was returned to full duty after receiving occupational therapy, and that his recent injury happened during civilian employment, and therefore was EPTS. The second injury to the member’s wrist occurred in civilian status in 2005, and is therefore not service connected. The complete BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit F. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02625

    Original file (BC-2004-02625.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Otherwise, the lower rating will be assigned.” Rating guidance contained in the VASRD, Section 4.7, Higher of two evaluations, states, “Where there is a question as to which of two evaluations shall be applied, the higher evaluation will be assigned if the disability picture more nearly approximates the criteria required for that rating. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2002-02843

    Original file (BC-2002-02843.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02843 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect that he suffers from clinical depression, and, that the cause of the depression comes from the ringing in his ears and migraine headaches. ...