RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02179
INDEX CODE: 108.01, 110.02, 131.00
COUNSEL: None
HEARING DESIRED: No
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 17 JAN 06
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
She be promoted to the grade of staff sergeant (SSgt) with all back
pay and allowances, and her 1989 discharge for pregnancy be changed to
a medical discharge for multiple service-connected medical conditions.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
She was subjected to extreme pressure, sexual harassment, misdiagnosis
of her pregnancy, unjust treatment from her superiors, and was forced
to separate under false pretenses despite multiple medical conditions
incurred in and aggravated by military service [temporomandibular
joint pain (TJP), bilateral pes planus, anemia, sinusitis,
dysmenorrheal, chronic fatigue, chest pain, depression, anxiety, post-
traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), “spasms . . . directly related to
scoliosis”]. Earlier in her career she was the victim of sexual
harassment in her job and the dormitory. She feared retaliation and
did not bring formal complaints of sexual advances/assaults. Despite
symptoms and her assertions of pregnancy, her tests were negative.
She became very ill because of the depression, anxiety and PTSD caused
by the harassment, and the misdiagnosis of her pregnancy. This
impacted her ability to do her job and cut short her career
progression. Her cry for help was ignored and she was on the verge of
a mental breakdown. She requested to be discharged from the military
for pregnancy in order to remove herself from this stressful
environment and maintain her sanity. However, she was not informed of
her rights to have a complete discharge physical/dental exam and she
was not given a proper separation out-processing briefing.
The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit
A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant underwent an enlistment physical on 28 Feb 85, and she
indicated she had frequent headaches that were helped by aspirin. She
enlisted in the Air Force Reserves under the Delayed Entry/Enlistment
Program (DEP) on 12 Mar 85. She enlisted in the Regular Air Force for
a period of four years on 15 Apr 85. The applicant’s first
performance report had an overall rating of 8; the remaining four
reports had overall ratings of 9. During the period in question, the
applicant was assigned to the 487th Combat Support Group (487 CSG) at
Comiso Air Station, Italy, as an accounting and finance administrative
specialist.
She was diagnosed with and treated for bilateral pes planus (flat feet-
-a congenital/developmental condition) in Jun 86. Around this
timeframe, she also sought care for bilateral anterior knee pain
consistent with patellofemoral pain syndrome. There are no further
entries for knee pain.
On 19 Aug 86, the applicant was evaluated and conservatively treated
in the dental clinic for left TJP. She was instructed to return to
the dental clinic if her symptoms did not resolve. Available
dental/medical records show no subsequent entries for this complaint.
In Oct 87, the applicant was evaluated for back discomfort, at which
time a mild scoliosis (a developmental condition) was noted. On
29 Oct 87, she reported feeling “pretty good” and X-rays showed a 15-
degree curvature. She was referred to physical therapy for postural
exercises. There are no further entries for back problems while on
active duty.
On 17 Nov 87, the applicant was treated for menstrual cramps,
reporting a history of menstrual cramps/dysmenorrheal since age 14
without relief from multiple medications. There are no other entries
for severe menstrual cramps while on active duty.
On 22 Dec 87, she was evaluated for left foot pain for the previous
two weeks without a history of trauma. Examination revealed no
evidence of swelling or tenderness to palpation and she was diagnosed
as having soft tissue pain, left foot. There are no other service
medical record entries for foot pain while the applicant was on active
duty.
Medical entries show treatment for occasional bouts of sinusitis,
including periods in Mar 87 and Oct 88.
On 17 Apr 89, the applicant’s request to change her name from G-- to M-
- due to marriage to another active duty member was approved.
On 26 May 89, when she was approximately eight weeks pregnant with an
estimated delivery date of 1 Jan 90, the applicant requested voluntary
separation, effective 30 Jun 89, due to pregnancy. The applicant
indicated her pregnancy was interfering with her military duties. At
the time of her separation, she was processed expeditiously to
accommodate her requested date of separation. She did not receive a
final dental exam and there is no separation medical exam in the
available records.
On 30 Jun 89, after 4 years, 2 months, and 16 days of active service,
the applicant was honorably discharged for pregnancy in the grade of
sergeant.
Following her discharge, the applicant continued to receive medical
care as a dependent wife of her active duty husband. Also following
discharge, she experienced problems with back pain and spasms during
her pregnancy that persisted following the delivery of her child.
Evaluation confirmed the presence of mild scoliosis and an orthopedic
evaluation on 5 Mar 90 doubted her mild scoliosis was related to her
occasional pains. Her orthopedic exam was otherwise normal.
Approximately two years after her separation, she was provided with
arch supports for discomfort related to her flat feet. In Sep 94, she
was evaluated for heavy, painful menses. Military medical records
following her discharge do show care for recurrent back pain and back
spasms, mild scoliosis, recurrent chest pain, anxiety, pregnancy
(twice), bilateral pes planus, mild anemia, sinusitis, dysmenorrheal,
and fatigue. They do not show entries following her separation for
care of TJP, depression, or PSTD. The applicant’s military medical
records end in Nov 96.
In Oct 02, the applicant filed a claim with the Department of Veterans
Affairs (DVA) using her maiden name. DVA Rating Decision, dated
14 Feb 03, denied service connection for TJP, joint pain, bilateral
pes planus, anemia, sinusitis, and dysmenorrheal.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPPWB points out the application is untimely because the
applicant waited approximately 15 years after separation to petition
the AFBCMR. There is no provision for an automatic promotion to SSgt
as she requests. She made a conscious decision to voluntarily
separate from the Air Force before being considered for promotion.
She is therefore not entitled to be promoted to SSgt, a grade to which
she was never selected. They recommend the case be time-barred or
denied.
A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.
The AFBCMR Medical Consultant advises review of the applicant’s
service medical records finds no evidence for anemia, chronic fatigue,
chest pain, “spasms . . . directly related to scoliosis,” depression,
anxiety, and PTSD. Her service medical records do show evaluation or
treatment for TJP, bilateral pes planus, sinusitis, dysmenorrheal, and
scoliosis. There is no evidence these conditions interfered with her
military duty or warranted referral for a Medical Evaluation Board
(MEB). There is no evidence in her military medical or personnel
records to support her contention of in-service traumas that might be
linked to her post-service problems of anxiety, depression, or PTSD.
A separation medical exam in not required by law; however, as a matter
of policy, the Air Force provides a separation exam which a member may
decline. There is no evidence in the medical records prior to the
applicant’s separation that medical conditions present while on active
duty warranted placement on medical hold for purposes of an MEB.
According to AFR 160-43, in force at the time, the fact that an
individual’s service is soon to be terminated for reasons other than
physical disability, e.g., expiration of enlistment, voluntary or
mandatory retirement, gives rise to a presumption that he/she has been
and remains medically qualified to perform the duties of his/her
office, grade, or rank in such a manner as to reasonably fulfill the
purpose of employment on active duty. There is no evidence any of her
medical conditions in service interfered with the performance of her
duty, as further exemplified by her last superior performance report.
The Consultant explains the differences between the military
Disability Evaluation System (DES), which operates under Title 10, and
the DVA’s system, which operates under Title 38. Denial is
recommended as action and disposition in this case was proper and
equitable, reflecting compliance Air Force directives.
A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
SAF/MRBR inadvertently sent a copy of only one of the two evaluations
to the applicant on 14 Jul 05. Complete copies of both evaluations
were forwarded to the applicant by the AFBCMR Staff on 20 Jul 05 for
review and comment within 30 days.
The applicant provided a rebuttal indicating she was forced out of the
military due to the constant and intense pressure of not knowing why
she was sick. Her illness eventually affected her mental well-being,
causing her to spend time away from work. She was highly motivated
and career-minded and should have been promoted to the next grade of
SSgt. She was not afforded separation counseling. Information was
withheld from her and she did not know about her rights to appeal.
The applicant’s complete rebuttal 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. After a thorough review of the
evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, we are not
persuaded she should be promoted to the grade of SSgt and discharged
for multiple service-connected medical conditions. The applicant’s
contentions are duly noted; however, we do not find these
uncorroborated assertions, in and by themselves, sufficiently
persuasive to override the evidence of record and the rationale
provided by the AFBCMR Medical Consultant and the Air Force. The
applicant has not shown she was forced to leave the Air Force under
false pretenses because of sexual harassment, extreme pressure, and
medical problems, as she alleges. She has not shown she suffered from
an unfitting condition at the time of her separation or should have
been promoted to the grade of SSgt. We therefore adopt the rationale
expressed by the Medical Consultant and the Air Force as the basis for
our decision that the applicant has not sustained her burden of having
suffered either an error or an injustice. In view of the above and
absent persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling
basis to recommend granting the relief sought.
_________________________________________________________________
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 September 2005 under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Panel Chair
Ms. Kathy L. Boockholdt, Member
Mr. Wallace F. Beard, Jr., Member
The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2004-02179 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 8 Jul 04, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 22 Sep 04.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMRF Medical Consultant,
dated 12 Jul 05.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Jul 05.
Exhibit F. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 20 Jul 05.
Exhibit G. Letter, Applicant, dated 18 Aug 05.
KATHLEEN F. GRAHAM
Panel Chair
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00761
The VA separately coded and rated the cervical and thoracolumbar spine conditions at 20% each based on the VA exam which indicated much decreased ROMs of the spine. The MEB and PEB coded the CI’s chest pain as due to the CI’s spine condition. ); and an unfitting chest pain condition, coded 5399-5321 and rated 10% (IAW VASRD §4.73).
AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00988
SAFPC, on 27 May 2008, found only the low back pain condition unfitting with a 10% rating, coded 5242. The Board noted that the profiles do not specify limitations based on ankle pain versus low back pain. After careful consideration of your application and treatment records, the Physical Disability Board of Review determined that the rating assigned at the time of final disposition of your disability evaluation system processing was appropriate.
AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-00184
The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to review of medical records and all available evidence for application of theVeterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. Post-Separation)ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Chronic Pain Bilateral Thighs, Ankles, and Feet5099-500310%Chronic Right Ankle Sprain…527110%20061107Chronic Left Ankle Sprain…527110%20061107Bilateral Pes...
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 00147
CI CONTENTION : “I had four different surgical procedures done by the Army on both feet which has resulted in continued pain, callouses and deformity of my toes in addition as a result of my military service. The examination was based on her evaluation on 28 October 2003. Physical Disability Board of Review
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01752
The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to review of medical records and all available evidence for application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. Over several months she noted improvement with Zoloft, which when discontinued in December1998, she again became depressedand it was reintroduced.In June 1999, she became overwhelmed by a move to a new duty station and...
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00088
The Formal PEB (FPEB) adjudicated “Fibromyalgia Associated with Depression and Fatigue” as unfitting and rated 20% with application of DoDI and Veterans Administration Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). The CI was then medically separated with a 20% disability. At the time of the MEB examination and the VA C&P examination, the CI had constant symptoms of joint pain, depression, fatigue, headache, and sleep disturbance that responded poorly to therapy.
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01755
Ratings for unfitting conditions will be reviewed in all cases.The rated, unfitting condition of bilateral foot painas well as Raynaud’sphenomenon, low back pain (LBP), left knee retropatellar pain syndrome (RPPS), hemorrhoids, cervical dysplasia, pelvic pain, and bilateral wrist pain conditions as requested for consideration meet the criteria prescribed in DoDI 6040.44 for Board purview.Any conditions or contention not requested in this application, or otherwise outside the Board’s defined...
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00189
X-rays were normal, but bilateral weight-bearing X-rays performed four months later showed pes planus. The NARSUM examiner (two weeks later) recorded a history of mild bilateral ankle pain, which was considered not unfitting by the PEB and rated 0% by the VA. The Board considered that the presence of functional impairment with a direct impact on fitness is the key determinant in the Board’s decision to recommend any condition for rating as additionally unfitting.
AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00121
The Board cannot find any evidence to support an opinion that the headache condition had risen to the level of an unfitting impairment at the time of separation. There are therefore no additional conditions in this case appropriate for Board recommendation as additionally unfitting for separation rating. In the matter of the neck condition (cervical spine fusion with radiation of pain in the upper extremity), and IAW VASRD §4.71a, the Board unanimously recommends no change in the PEB...
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00565
Please re-evaluate my Medical Evaluation Board from the Army and my medical records from my extensive period of active duty service (11 years, 5 months total) as well as VA medical records.” Bilateral Foot Pain Condition . The Board thus recommends separate 10% ratings for each foot under the code 5399-5310.