RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01892
INDEX CODE: 100.00
XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: YES
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 19 DEC 2005
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
She be reinstated on active duty in order to undergo a Medical Evaluation
Board (MEB) for sarcoidosis.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Five days after her separation, a Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA)
disability physical revealed an abnormality in her chest.
Her final physical examination was rushed/incomplete, x-ray requests were
denied, and her health complaints were not taken seriously for a year and a
half.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant was commissioned a first lieutenant Air Force Reserve and served
as a Reserve Chaplain at XXXXXXXXX AFB from 2 February 1990 to 11 December
1995. She was progressively promoted to the grade of captain. She entered
active duty on 12 December 1995 and served as an Air Force Chaplain. She
underwent a separation medical examination on 29 January 2004, complained
of fatigue, and was not referred for further evaluation. She was released
from active duty on 31 January 2004 due to non-selection for promotion to
the grade of major. She completed 8 years, 1 month, and 19 days of active
service. Her Officer Performance Reports (OPRs) rendered during the period
1991 through 2003 indicate she met standards on all performance factors.
X-rays taken during her 5 February 2004 DVA disability evaluation showed a
possible abnormality in her chest and regular chest x-rays were
recommended. She underwent arthroscopy with arthroscopic subacromial
decompression and rotator cuff partial thickness tear debridement on 21
July 2004, at the 10th Medical Group, USAF Academy. On 23 August 2004, the
DVA awarded her a total combined compensable service-connected disability
rating of 60% from 1 February 2004 to 20 July 2004, 100% from 21 July 2004
to 30 September 2004, and 60% from 1 October 2004 to the present, for
bipolar disorder (claimed as major depression) – 30%; degenerative joint
disease, cervical spine – 20%; and degenerative joint disease, left and
right shoulder – 10%.
________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The BCMR Medical Consultant is of the opinion that no change in the records
is warranted and states, in part, that applicant had numerous chronic
medical problems while on active duty that did not prevent her from
satisfactorily performing her duties, as evidenced by her Officer
Performance Reports (OPRs) which document her outstanding performance.
Within days after her separation, she was noted to have enlarged lymph
nodes in the chest during her DVA medical examination felt most consistent
with sarcoidosis. Sarcoidosis is a disease of unknown etiology
characterized by the formation of microscopic inflammatory nodules called
granulomas that can affect a wide variety of organs in the body but
typically involves the lymph nodes in the chest in most but not all cases.
While the applicant contends her sarcoidosis was causing her fatigue, she
had numerous other reasons for fatigue and sarcoidosis limited to the chest
lymph nodes is asymptomatic in most individuals. The mere presence of
sarcoidosis does not automatically require an MEB or a medical discharge.
Sarcoidosis is considered potentially disqualifying for continued military
service if it is progressive with severe or multiple organ involvement and
not responsive to therapy. There is no evidence she was symptomatic from
sarcoidosis and no evidence the condition involved any other organ system
other than her chest lymph nodes. Further, available post-service medical
records do not show evidence of a multi-system disease or evidence of skin,
eye, or neurologic disease that could be attributed to sarcoidosis. Active
duty members who develop medical problems during the final 12 months of
their active duty period with a scheduled separation are presumed fit for
continued active duty unless there is clear and convincing evidence to the
contrary. In the applicant’s case, she was entitled to, and received,
transitional health care coverage under Tri-Care following her separation
including orthopedic surgery, pulmonary specialty care, radiographic
imaging, and heart imaging. The action and disposition in the case are
proper and at the time of her separation, her condition did not warrant
medical hold for diagnosis and treatment or for evaluation in the
disability evaluation system.
The BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A complete copy of the evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 15 July
2005 for review and comment, within 30 days. However, as of this date, no
response has been received by this office.
________________________________________________________________
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 agree
with the opinion and recommendation of the BCMR Medical Consultant and
adopt his rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has
not been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, in the absence of
evidence to the contrary, 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 Docket Number BC-2004-01892
in Executive Session on 30 August 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Ms. B. J. White-Olson, Panel Chair
Ms. Janet L. Hassan, Member
Mr. Patrick C. Daugherty, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 9 Jun 04, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 30 Jun 05.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Jul 05.
B. J. WHITE-OLSON
Panel Chair
AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-02007
SEPARATION DATE: 20080804 The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to review of medical records and all available evidence for application of the VASRD standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. The rating was based on clinical records that documented in October 2011 the CI reported pain and inflammation, and the VA respiratory examination in June 2012 that documented continued complaints of fatigue and intermittent chest...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-01586
She struggled with her weight from that time until she was discharged in 1998. On 12 January 1998, the applicant’s commander notified the applicant he was recommending she be discharged from the Air Force for Failure in the Weight Management Program. After summarizing the relevant facts contained in the applicant’s service personnel and medical records and her DVA records, the BCMR Medical Consultant indicated that, although not definitively diagnosed while in service, service medical...
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01313
Sarcoidosis 2. A 10% disability rating was assigned based on the 9434 code and a“mild social and industrial impairment.”The CI appealed and both a FPEB and USAPDA affirmed the 10% disability rating.In December 2001, the VA determined that both sarcoidosis and depression had EPTS and neither had been aggravated by service. SUBJECT: Department of Defense Physical Disability Board of Review Recommendation for AR20130012146 (PD201201313)I have reviewed the enclosed Department of Defense...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060002530C070205
The applicant states he was discharged with a 10 percent disability rating, but the medical board did not include other injuries and conditions listed in his medical records. On 14 July 2005, an MEB referred the applicant to a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) for diagnoses of low back pain (L4-S1) degenerative disc disease, slight/intermittent; and plantar fasciitis (slight/intermittent). The Rating Decision noted that, before service connection can be granted, a disability which began in...
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00424
Hip Condition . In the matter of the hip condition, the Board unanimously recommends permanent separation rating of 10% for each hip, coded 5299-5255 IAW VASRD §4.40, §4.45, §4.59, and §4.71a. Providing a correction to the individual’s separation document showing that the individual was separated by reason of permanent disability retirement effective the date of the original medical separation for disability with severance pay.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01236
On 26 July 2001, the SAFPC determined the applicant was physically unfit for continued military service due to a physical disability which existed prior to service and directed she be separated without disability benefits. The disability processing records indicate the applicant was treated fairly throughout her DES process and was properly rated under disability laws and policy at the time of her medical discharge. The applicant’s case was processed through the medical...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01947
________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: AFPC/DPPD recommends the application be denied, and states, in part the applicant was processed through the Disability Evaluation System (DES) and was found unfit for continued military service based on asthma which existed prior to service. The applicant contends the determination that her asthma existed prior to her service was solely based on the single sentence in the MEB that she reported using an...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01923
The February 1979, TDRL evaluation showed his Hodgkin's Disease was still in remission and he had recovered from his Guillain Barre Syndrome with only minimal evidence of any residual weakness. The BCMR Medical Consultant's complete advisory is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant states that he elected not to reenlist because he was forced to find work while he was on the TDRL. After...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002075461C070403
I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. APPLICANT REQUESTS: That her spouse, currently a service member (SM) in the Army National Guard but medically incompetent, be returned to active duty and then permanently retired by reason of physical disability. While not the applicant’s solution of choice, the VA might make an independent decision granting service-connection...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-01708
BCMR Medical Consultant's complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 3 February 2005 for review and comment within 30 days. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case to include her contention that the DVA's decision to award her an overall combined compensable disability...