RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00876
INDEX CODE: 108.00, 124.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 16 SEP 06
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
1. Her records be changed to reflect permanent disability retirement.
2. The AF Forms 356, Findings and Recommended Disposition of USAF
Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) be corrected to reflect the same ailments.
3. The term “African” be removed from her medical records.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
She would like the term African stricken from all references made to her in
her medical records. She is an American and has no allegiance to any
country other than the United States of America.
In regard to the AF Forms 356, applicant states one AF form 356 indicates
four ailments and the other 15 - they should read the same. The Department
of Veterans Affairs - VA Form 21-526 lists all 18 of her actual ailments.
A torn medical meniscus is not listed on either form and she was diagnosed
with this ailment on 1 April 2002. She would like the medication that she
takes to be accurately accounted for and would like to have the knee pain
and diabetes statements removed from page two of the AF Form 356 dated 5
November 2004. She further states fibromyalgia is not her only ailment and
does not understand how the military wants to isolate that one debilitating
condition and use it to force her to quit or be discharged with severance
pay. She also asks that the inference of her having hemoglobin C disease
and homozygosis (CC) because she is of African descent be removed. She
also states there is no mention in her medical records of the motor vehicle
accident she was involved in during Operation Desert Storm. She received
contusions, bruises, lower back bruising, shoulder pain and bruising, and
there was a concern about the seventh column of her spinal area. She
remained in the hospital over night and was informed to see a doctor when
she returned home in mid-May if problems persisted.
In support of her request, applicant provides documents extracted from her
military personnel and medical records.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant entered the Air Force Reserves in 1982. She served 22 years
and 24 days of satisfactory service to include 4 years and 24 days on
active duty.
At the time of the applicant’s enlistment medical examination on 3 August
1982, she self-reported her race as “NEG.” On a DD Form 1966, the
applicant checked her population group as black. Her personnel record
(SURF) lists her race as “Black/African American.”
An AF Form 348, Line of Duty Determination, dated 16 January 2003, states
the applicant was called to active duty and deployed to A1 Jaber Air Base,
Kuwait and Bagram AAF, Afghanistan in support of Operation Enduring Freedom
from 2 April 2002 through 14 July 2002. During that time she lived and
worked for approximately two months at Bagram AAF, in an extremely harsh
and dusty environment under poor sanitary conditions. At the end of the
deployment the applicant began to experience prolonged nausea accompanied
by vomiting, diarrhea and stomach cramps. The illness impacted her ability
to perform her duties effectively. On 11 July she reported to sick call at
the medical clinic at A1 Jaber Kuwait. The preliminary diagnosis was food
poisoning even though she told them that she had not eaten anything for a
couple of days. Immediately upon her return to the United States her
symptoms intensified and became more frequent. On 22 July she was seen by
the Navy medical personnel at Belle Chasse Naval Air Station, New Orleans,
LA. The clinic prescribed medication but failed to diagnose any illness.
Unable to receive the necessary help or attention from the naval facility
she was sent to Keesler AFB.
An AF Form 618, Medical Board Report, dated 23 June 2004, states the
applicant was diagnosed with hemoglobin C, left leg/knee pain, nausea,
vomiting and cramps, excess flatulence, diarrhea and vomiting,
hypertension, esophageal reflux, non-alcoholic steatohepatitis, resection
of leiomyoma and appendectomy, iron deficiency anemia, impaired fasting
glucose, history of thyroid dysfunction (possible hypothyroidism during
childhood), fibromyalgia, abnormal serum liver enzymes, history of
increased creatinine kinase, and Axis I: somatization, Axis II: mixed
cluster B personality traits, and Axis III: GI complaints. The case was
referred to the PEB.
AF Form 356, Findings and Recommended Disposition of USAF Formal Physical
Evaluation Board (FPEB), dated 5 November 2004, indicates the applicant was
diagnosed with Category 1 - Unfitting conditions which are compensable and
ratable: fibromyalgia; Category II - Conditions that can be unfitting but
are not currently compensable or ratable: 1. homozygosis (CC) hemoglobin C
disease, associated with nausea, vomiting, cramps, non-alcoholic
steatophepatitis, iron anemia, and left lower extremity pain; 2.
Hypertension; and 3. Left knee pain. Category III - Conditions that can be
unfitting but are not currently - overweight. Additional findings indicate
the applicant was unfit because of physical disability with a compensable
percentage rate of 20 percent. On 8 November 2004, the applicant did not
agree with the findings of the recommended disposition of the formal PEB
hearing and desired to submit a rebuttal.
On 30 December 2004, the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council
(SAF/PC) determined the applicant was physically unfit for continued
military service and directed he be discharged and receive severance pay
with a disability rating of 20 percent under the provisions of Title 10,
United States Code (USC), Section 1203.
On 27 January 2005, the applicant was retired in the grade of master
sergeant under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 - USAFR Member Released to
Retire.
Reserve Order EK-2915, dated 8 February 2005, states the applicant was
assigned to the Retired Reserve effective 28 January 2005, under the
provisions of AFI 36-3209, Chapter 5 - Physically Disqualified for Active
Duty.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The BCMR Medical Consultant indicates a review of the medical record and
the documents produced by the PEBs show minor documentary errors or minor
variations in listing diagnosis (knee pain instead of small meniscus tear)
and do not manifest an error or injustice or result in altering the
determination of unfit with a rating of 20 percent. The applicant also
requests removal of the term “African American” from her medical records
and states that she is an American without any specific ethnic root or
allegiance. The case file contains a memo by the applicant in which she
reports that her heritage is Native American, French, Spanish, and Irish -
not African American. At time of her enlistment medical examination on 3
August 1982, the applicant self reported her race as “NEG.” In block 7,
population group, on her application for enlistment, DD Form 1966, the
applicant checked her population group as black and did not check the
blocks for “Am Indian,” White,” “Asian,” or “Other.” Her personnel record
(SURF) lists her race as “Black/African American.” For decades, it has
been standard practice in medical documentation and professional clinical
communication (physician to physician) to note the race or ethnicity and
gender of the patient at the very beginning of the medical history because
of disease risk, incidence patterns, and treatment responses that varied by
race, ethnicity and gender. It is noted that the applicant has hemoglobin
C trait, a genetic defect of hemoglobin originating from West African
populations. Although she objects to the use in her medical record, the
references to race in the applicant’s medical records are consistent with
accepted standards of medical documentation used in all patients.
The BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 26 May 2006, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, this
office has received no response.
_________________________________________________________________
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 an error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant's
complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we are not
persuaded that her request for a permanent disability retirement is
warranted. Evidence has not been presented which would lead us to believe
that during her Disability Evaluation System processing, she was denied
rights to which she was entitled, the appropriate regulations were not
followed or that the appropriate standards were not applied. In regard to
the AF Forms 356 being inconsistent, we note that there are variations in
listing diagnosis; however, in light of the Air Force's determination and
after completion of each medical evaluation, processing of her case would
have resulted with the same outcome, unfit with a rating of 20 percent.
Therefore, we do not believe she has been the victim of an injustice. Her
contentions regarding the term “African” removed from her records are duly
noted; however, it is the Board’s opinion that the comments provided by the
BCMR Medical Consultant adequately address her concerns. Therefore, the
Board is in agreement with the comments and recommendation of the Medical
Consultant and adopt his rationale as the basis for the determination that
the applicant has not been the victim of either an error or injustice. In
view of the above and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Board
finds no compelling basis upon which to recommend favorable action on this
application.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the
existence of an error or an injustice; the application was denied without a
personal appearance; and 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-2005-
00876 in Executive Session on 26 July 2006, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Jay H. Jordan, Panel Chair
Ms. Patricia R. Collins, Member
Ms. Renee M. Collier, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 8 Mar 06, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 24 May 06.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 May 06.
JAY H. JORDAN
Panel Chair
AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-00387
The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to review of medical records and all available evidence for application of theVASRDstandards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. She reported GI symptoms 8 months out of the year. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXPresidentDoD Physical Disability Board of Review
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD 2012 01293
She was then medically separated with a 10% disability rating. Prior to Separation) Effective 19990304 Condition Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam 20030429 TDRL Sep. Ileocolonic Crohns Disease w/ DJD 7399-7323 30% 10% Crohns Disease s/p ileocolonic resection 7323 30% 19990106 Inflammatory Arthritis Secondary to Crohns 5009-5002 20%* 19990106 and 20050301 .No Additional MEB/PEB Entries. The VA GI exam, approximately 9 months prior to separation, noted that the CIs...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00259
The Board recommended discharge with severance pay with a disability rating of 20 percent. Further, it must be noted the Air Force disability boards must rate disabilities based on the member's condition at the time of evaluation; in essence a snapshot of their condition at that time. The complete DPFD evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 17 Feb 2013, a copy of the Air Force evaluation...
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00385
Anagrelide (Agrylin) is used to decrease the number of platelets (a type of blood cell that is needed to control bleeding) in the blood of patients who have a myeloproliferative disorder (condition in which the body makes too many of one or more types of blood cells) such as Essential Thrombocythemia (also called Essential Thrombocytosis; condition in which the body makes too many platelets) or Polycythemia Vera (condition in which the body makes too many red blood cells and sometimes too...
AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-01545
A 10% rating requires the symptoms to be “mild” and a higher rating of 30%, requires the condition to be “severe”.The Board unanimously agreed that well-established medical principles documents that the upper abdominal pain with diarrhea and episodic elevation of liver enzymes is a known consequence of cholecystectomy and that this may occur acutely or at distant interval after surgery unrelated to known stimuli.The Board unanimously agreed that, based on acceptable medical practice, the...
CG | BCMR | Disability Cases | 2010-001
APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant, a health services technician who was released from active duty into the Reserve on July 24, 2008, asked the Board to correct her record to reinstate her on active duty and to order the Coast Guard to process her under the Coast Guard’s Physical Disability Evalua- tion System (PDES) prior to her release from active duty (RELAD). A cursory review reveals that her medical records reflect the symptoms and diagnoses claimed in the application...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100026624
It is in the interest of justice to consider this case because: * It involves long-term institutional discrimination * It requires promotion and assignment data and statistics for proof * The National Guard Bureau (NGB) was often unresponsive to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests and misdirected and/or delayed replies for many months * Key witness testimony was delayed * Counsel was delayed due to his own disability * The State Senator has concerns about discrimination within the...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01911
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant responded by stating, her record does not clearly reflect that she has significant and progressively worsening degenerative disc disease at the time of the original boards. The records states that she had progressively worsening muscle spasms and neck pain; there is clearly a difference between the two statements. She asks, Does not intermittent mean occurring in...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002068526C070402
The applicant was considered but not selected for promotion. The applicant was considered but not selected for promotion. On 24 January 2002, PERSCOM informed him that promotion reconsideration was authorized under Title 10, U. S. Code and approved when records contained a material error when they were considered by a promotion selection board.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001065372C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. Although the applicant's service medical records were not available to the Board, a narrative summary, completed in December 1999 as part of a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB), indicated the applicant's chief medical complaint was "neck and back pain." Subsequent to the applicant's separation, in June 2001, the VA granted the applicant a combined disability rating of 60...