RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-02870
            INDEX CODE:  108.00
            COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

      MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 20 Mar 07

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to reflect he was medically  retired,  rather  than
discharged with severance pay.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

At the time of his discharge it was indicated that  his  condition  was  not
permanent; however, he is still unfit because he has only one kidney.

In support of his request applicant provided a copy  of  his  DD  Form  214,
Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer  or  Discharge;  and  a
copy of  his  AF  Form  356,  Proceedings  and  Findings  of  USAF  Physical
Evaluation Board.  His complete submission, with attachments, is at  Exhibit
A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted  in  the  Regular  Air  Force  on  26  Jul  67.   He  was
progressively promoted to the grade of sergeant, having assumed  that  grade
effective and with a date of rank of 1 Dec 69.

On 24 Sep 71, a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB)  convened  and  referred  his
case to a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) with a diagnosis  of  status  post
right radical nephrectomy for malignant hypernephroma of the kidney.   On  6
Oct 71, the PEB recommended that he be placed on  the  Temporary  Disability
Retired List (TDRL)  with  a  combined  compensable  rating  of  100%.   The
applicant concurred with the findings and  recommended  disposition  of  the
PEB.  He was placed on the TDRL on 27  Nov  71.   A  TDRL  reevaluation  was
performed on 6 Mar 73.  On 20 Mar 73, the Air Force PEB  determined  he  was
fit for duty,  his  condition  existed  prior  to  service  without  service
aggravation, and  recommended  that  he  be  removed  from  the  TDRL.   The
applicant concurred with the findings and recommendation.  On 18 May 73,  he
was removed from the TDRL and because his Expiration of Term of Service  had
expired, he was discharged from the Air Force.  He served 4 years, 5  months
and 8 days on active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical  Consultant  recommends  denial.   The  Medical  Consultant
states while  serving  on  active  duty  the  applicant  underwent  curative
surgical removal of his right kidney for treatment  of  a  malignant  tumor.
Twenty months after his surgery he felt well and there was  no  evidence  of
recurrent or metastatic cancer and renal function was shown  to  be  normal.
Loss  of  one  kidney  was  not  (and  is  not  under   current   standards)
disqualifying for continued  military  service.   Successful  treatment  for
cancer without evidence of residual, recurrent,  or  metastatic  cancer  was
also not disqualifying for continued service.

The Military Disability Evaluation System can only  offer  compensation  for
those service incurred diseases or injuries which  specifically  rendered  a
member unfit for continued service, were the cause for termination of  their
career, and then only for the degree of impairment present at  the  time  of
separation and not based on future possibilities.  The mere  presence  of  a
condition does not qualify a member for  disability  evaluation.   Placement
on the TDRL enables temporary retirement with compensation  pending  further
treatment  and  observation  before  final  determination  of   fitness   or
adjudication of the compensation rating of unfit.  By DoD policy new  cancer
diagnoses receive a 100  percent  rating  while  on  the  TDRL  due  to  the
expectation that frequently members diagnosed  with  cancer  are  likely  to
require continued extensive treatments.  In this case, he was cured  of  his
cancer and showed no evidence of cancer 20 months after  his  surgery.   The
DVA, operating under Title 38 is chartered to offer  compensation  and  care
to eligible veterans for any service-connected  disease  or  injury  without
regard to whether it was unfitting for  continued  military  service.   This
differs substantially from the requirement  that  the  condition  have  been
incurred or permanently aggravated beyond the  natural  progression  of  the
condition  and  been  unfitting  at  the  time   for   military   disability
compensation.  The presence of conditions that were not unfitting  while  in
service, and were not the cause of  separation  or  retirement,  that  later
progress in severity causing disability resulting in service  connected  DVA
compensation  is  not  an  unusual  occurrence  and  is  not  a   basis   to
retroactively   grant   military   disability   discharge   or    disability
compensation.  The fact that he developed either renal failure or  recurrent
renal cancer thirty years after discharge is not a  basis  to  retroactively
grant disability retirement from the Air Force even if  the  conditions  are
considered service connected.   The  Medical  Consultant  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 25  Apr
06 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 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 an error or injustice warranting corrective  action.   We  took
notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits  of  the
case; however, we do not find  his  assertions  sufficiently  persuasive  to
override the rationale provided by the  Air  Force.   We  see  no  evidence,
which would lead us to believe that at  the  time  of  his  separation,  his
physical  condition  met  the  criteria  as  disqualifying  from   worldwide
military service.  Therefore, we see  no  reason  why  he  would  have  been
eligible for further consideration  in  the  disability  evaluation  system.
Evidence has not been  presented  which  would  show  that  the  applicant’s
disability processing and the final disposition of his case were  in  error,
contrary to the provisions of the governing Air Force regulations,  or  that
he was denied rights to which he was entitled.  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.  In the absence of evidence to  the  contrary,  we
find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

_________________________________________________________________

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-2005-
02870 in Executive Session on 13 Jun 06, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

      Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Panel Chair
      Mr. Wallace F. Beard, Jr., Member
      Ms. Karen A. Holloman, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 12 Sep 05, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 25 Apr 06.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Apr 06.




                                   KATHLEEN F. GRAHAM
                                   Panel Chair