RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00019
INDEX CODE: 108.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His records be corrected to reflect he was permanently retired by
reason of physical disability with a compensable rating of 50 percent,
rather than 30 percent.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) increased his disability
rating for his left hip replacement from 30 percent to 50 percent.
They made this determination based upon his official Air Force
records. The DVA found that his condition had increased in severity.
He believes the Air Force incorrectly and unjustly denied him
equitable disability compensation.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provided an expanded
statement, documentation pertaining to his disability retirement, and
his DVA rating.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Available documentation indicates the applicant was relieved from
active duty and his name was placed on the Temporary Disability
Retired List (TDRL), effective 22 Jul 97, in the grade of lieutenant
colonel, with a compensable disability rating of 50 percent, after he
was diagnosed with severe avascular necrosis, left, hip, status post
12 Dec 96 total hip arthroplasty. He was credited with 24 years, 10
months, and 2 days of active service.
On 5 Aug 99, the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC)
under its delegated authority directed that the applicant’s name be
removed from the TDRL under the provisions of 10 USC 1210, and he be
permanently retired with a compensable disability rating of 30 percent
under the provisions of 10 USC 1201.
On 14 Sep 99, the applicant’s name was removed from the TDRL and he
was permanently retired in the grade of lieutenant colonel, with a
compensable disability rating of 30 percent. He is receiving retired
pay based on length of service (over 60 percent) since that results in
a higher pay than if based on the disability rating (30 percent).
A Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) Rating Decision, dated 15 Sep
99, indicates the applicant’s service-connected disability
compensation for avascular necrosis of the left hip femoral head with
residual scarring was increased from 30 percent to 50 percent.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Medical Consultant recommended denial noting the applicant was
diagnosed with avascular necrosis of bone (interruption of blood
supply to the bone resulting in the death of the bone followed by
gradual breakdown of the bony portion of the joint structure)
involving the left femoral head (thigh bone at the hip joint) in 1985
after a one to two year history of increasing, intermittent left hip
pain. The applicant underwent total hip replacement in Dec 96 with
good result. The applicant demonstrated good range of motion and no
neuromuscular or functional deficits were documented other than the
usual limitations placed on hip replacement patients to avoid
activities that place undue stress on the prosthesis. The minimum
Veterans Administration Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD)
rating for hip replacement is 30 percent. To receive a rating of
50 percent, there should be "moderately severe residuals of weakness,
pain or limitation of motion.” The Medical Consultant indicated that
available documentation did not show the presence of moderately severe
residuals of weakness, pain or limitation motion, rather, only mild
residuals were documented. If the applicant's hip condition were to
be rated on loss of range of motion, a rating of zero percent would
result. Because there was a prosthesis present with the associated
limitations inherent in all hip replacements, a minimum rating of 30
percent was stipulated in the VASRD.
The Medical Consultant stated the military service disability system,
operating under Title 10, and the DVA disability system. operating
under Title 38, are complementary systems not intended to be
duplicative. Operating under different laws with a different purpose,
adjudication decisions made by the Department of the Defense (DoD)
under Title 10 and the DVA under Title 38 are not determinative of the
issues involved in the other.
In the Medical Consultant’s view, the action and disposition in this
case were proper and equitable reflecting compliance with the Air
Force directives that implement in the law, and that no change in the
records is warranted.
A complete copy of the Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit
C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 28
May 04 for review and response (Exhibit D). By letter, dated 2 Jun
04, the applicant requested his case be temporarily withdrawn (Exhibit
E).
Applicant subsequently provided a response to the Medical Consultant’s
advisory opinion indicating he believes that clear evidence in the
form of medical evaluations and the DVA disability rating of 50
percent because of his left hip replacement compels the Board to find
in his favor. In his view, a disability rating of 50 percent is the
proper and fair rating for his disability.
Applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit G.
_________________________________________________________________
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 applicant’s assertions and the
documentation presented in support of his appeal sufficiently
persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Medical
Consultant. The evidence of record indicates the applicant was
permanently retired by reason of physical disability with a 30 percent
compensable rating. He now requests his disability rating be
increased to 50 percent. However, after a thorough review of facts
and circumstances of this case, no evidence has been presented which
shows to our satisfaction the applicant was improperly diagnosed or
inappropriately rated. In view of the foregoing, and in the absence
of sufficient evidence to the contrary, we adopt the Medical
Consultant’s rationale as the basis for our decision the applicant has
failed to sustain his burden of establishing that he has suffered
either an error or an injustice. Accordingly, we find no compelling
basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.
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-
2004-00019 in Executive Session on 3 Feb 05, under the provisions of
AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
Ms. Renee M. Collier, Member
Ms. Cheryl V. Jacobson, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 31 Dec 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, Medical Consultant, dated 25 May 04.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 May 04.
Exhibit E. Letter, applicant, dated 2 Jun 04.
Exhibit F. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 7 Jun 04.
Exhibit G. Letter, applicant, dated 17 Nov 04, w/atchs.
THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
Chair
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00842
The Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) adjudicated the right hip heterotopic ossification and left wrist scaphoid avascular necrosis conditions as unfitting, rated 10% respectively, with application of the Veteran’s Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). Left Wrist Condition. RECOMMENDATION: The Board, therefore, recommends that there be no recharacterization of the CI’s disability and separation determination, as follows: UNFITTING CONDITION Right Hip Heterotopic...
AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00713
The PEB adjudicated the avascular necrosis condition as unfitting, rated 20% respectively, with application of DoDI 1332.39 and Veterans’ Administration Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD), respectively. Flexion (0-125)90⁰60⁰Extension (0)0⁰#⁰Abduction (0-45)#⁰20⁰Adduction (0-45)#⁰#⁰Commentint/ext rotation normal§4.71a Rating20%20%The PEB found the avascular necrosis condition unfitting, coded 5255 (femur, impairment of), with a 20% rating. After careful consideration of your...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004103221C070208
The Rating Decision noted that a 40 percent rating (for the applicant's hip condition) was granted because the physical examination showed he could flex his hip only 10 degrees. It is also noted that the Army rated the applicant's knee condition in May 1994 at 10 percent whereas the VA, even after his numerous complaints of knee problems after the PEB, initially awarded a zero percent rating for his knee condition. There is no evidence that the applicant's ankle condition or injury to his...
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01406
SEPARATION DATE: 20071220 It did note that the VA subsequently raised the rating for the ankle to 30%, but not until the 19 January 2011 rating decision which was effective 4 November 2009 (24month after separation) and based on an examination obtained in April 2010 (28 months post-separation). In the matter of the left ankle condition, the Board unanimously recommends a disability rating of 10%, coded 5010 IAW VASRD §4.71a.There were no other conditions within the Board’s scope of review...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1990-1993 | 9308657
The Board denied the applicant’s original application in a Memorandum of Consideration (COPY ATTACHED) on 14 September 1994. However, since hypothyroidism is not unfitting it would not have been rated by the PEB even if it were known that he had that condition. As such, the applicant has not submitted any evidence which shows that his disability was not properly rated by the Army at the time of his discharge.
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02717
DATE OF PLACEMENT ONTO TDRL: 20030523DATE OF REMOVAL FROM TDRL: 20070301 The “avascular necrosis of the bilateral femur heads, left greater than right” was forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501.No other conditionwas submitted by the MEB.The Informal PEB adjudicated his bilateral hip conditions as unfitting, rated 20% left and 10% right, citing application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). It then considered the right hip and left hip...
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01681
The neuropsychological report dated 12 April 2004, 3 months prior to separation, reported the CI had concentration and memory problems and mild headaches about twice a week. After due deliberation, considering all of the evidence and mindful of VASRD §4.3 (reasonable doubt), the Board recommends a disability rating of 10% for the left hip condition only.Members agreed that based on the evidence, the right hip pain was not separately unfitting. In the matter of the left hip condition, the...
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 00988
At the beginning I used to fell pain when I walked for long distances and/or periods of time but for the past 3 or 4 years I feel pain very bad all the time. Post-Separation) ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam STRESS FRACTURE OF FEMORAL HEAD5099-50030%R FEMORAL HEAD OF VASCULAR NECROSIS5299-525510%*20040413No Additional MEB/PEB EntriesOther x 020040803 Combined: 0%Combined: 10%Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD)dated 20041105 ( most proximate to date of separation [DOS]). BOARD...
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD 2011 00417
Non tender, but pain with use §4.71a Rating 20 % (5271) 20 % (5271) 10 % (5271) 10 % (5271)The Board directs attention to its rating recommendationbased on the above evidence.The PEB adjudicated the chronic bilateral ankle pain secondary to bilateral avascular necrosis of the talus and pes planus with application of VASRD § 4.14, avoidance of pyramiding as a single unfitting condition and assigned a disability rating of 20%, analogous to degenerative joint disease. The Board determined that...
The applicant was found unfit and his name was placed on the TDRL on 8 Sep 93 for physical disability subsequent to a diagnosis of avascular necrosis of the right hip with a 30 percent disability rating after 16 years and 2 months on active duty. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. The Chief, Inquiries/Special Actions Section, AFMPC/DPMAJW1, also reviewed this application and indicated that based on the DPMMMR’s finding that the applicant’s placement on the...