RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-02758
                                             INDEX CODE:  110.12
      XXXXXXX                           COUNSEL:  NONE

                                             HEARING DESIRED:  NO


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  15 January 2008


________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

She be returned to duty.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She is still fit for duty and has support from her chain of command all  the
way up to the wing commander.

Based on a May 2003 diagnosis of Crohn’s disease, she  had  surgery  in  May
2005 and had only one flare-up in January 2006.  Although surgery is  not  a
cure, she has been feeling great and her disease could be in  remission  for
five to ten years.  Following her surgery she was placed  on  six  weeks  of
convalescent leave; however, she returned to duty after  only  three  weeks.
In total, she has missed less work  than  what  mothers  get  for  maternity
leave.  As evidenced by her performance  reports  rendered  since  her  2003
diagnosis her duty  performance  has  been  exceptional.   Furthermore,  her
disease has never interfered with her responsibilities as a  noncommissioned
officer (NCO).   Although  an  Informal  Physical  Evaluation  Board  (IPEB)
recommended her permanent retirement in 2006, she appeared before  a  formal
PEB (FPEB), who recommended her return to duty.  Due to  the  wide  variance
between the two boards, her case was ultimately considered by the  Secretary
of the Air Force Personnel  Council  (SAFPC),  who  directed  her  permanent
retirement, effective 25 September  2006.   Since  she  physically  appeared
before the FPEB, that included a medical officer, and they were able to  see
that she was doing fine their recommendation should carry more  weight  than
that of the IPEB.

In support of the  appeal,  applicant  submits  a  copy  of  her  Disability
Evaluation System paperwork  and  statements  from  her  wing  and  squadron
commanders, wing commander’s executive officer and her first sergeant.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant was presented to an MEB to  consider  whether  she  should  be
continued on active duty.  On 7 April  2006,  the  MEB  recommended  she  be
referred to an Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB).  On 1  June  2006,
an IPEB found  her  unfit  for  continued  military  service  based  on  the
diagnosis  of  Fibrostenotic  Crohn’s  disease  and   recommended   she   be
permanently retired, with a compensable rating of 30 percent.  She  did  not
concur with the findings and recommendation of  the  IPEB  and  requested  a
formal hearing.  On 26 June 2006, a Formal PEB (FPEB) found her fit,  noting
that  for  the  past  three  months  her  disease  was  well-controlled   on
maintenance medications and that her return to duty was  strongly  supported
by her chain of command.  Based on the medical evidence and the  applicant’s
testimony, the FPEB recommended that she be  returned  to  duty.   The  FPEB
opined that it was a reasonable risk to return her to duty and that  if  her
condition again  became  problematic  that  another  MEB  would  be  likely.
Although the applicant agreed with the  FPEB  findings  and  recommendation,
because of the wide variance between the IPEB and the  FPEB,  her  case  was
presented to the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council  (SAFPC).   On
21 July 2006, the SAFPC concurred  with  the  IPEB  and  the  applicant  was
permanently retired by reason of physical disability effective 26  September
2006, rated at 30 percent.  She completed 12 years  and  5  days  of  active
service.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPD recommends the application be denied and states the  preponderance
of the evidence reflects that no error  or  injustice  occurred  during  the
disability  processing.   Given  the  significant  disparity   between   the
decisions of the  IPEB  and  FPEB,  the  Special  Assistant  to  the  SAFPC,
determined her case warranted review by the SAFPC.  In a  memorandum,  dated
21 July 2006, the Director SAFPC noted  the  strong  support  for  retention
from both the applicant’s squadron and wing commanders and  summarized  that
her clinical disorder would continue to prohibit her utilization as a  Total
Force asset well into the  foreseeable  future,  even  if  reassigned  to  a
continental  United  States  location.   This  factor  was   found   to   be
particularly  relevant  in  the   context   of   the   austere   operational
environments and combined  physical  and  mental  stressor  confronting  all
members of today’s Air and Space Expeditionary Force.

The AFPC/DPPD evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________




APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the  applicant  on  6
October 2006, 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.  In this respect,  we  note  the  applicant
was found unfit for continued military service based  on  the  diagnosis  of
Fibrostenotic Crohn’s disease  and  was  processed  through  the  Disability
Evaluation System.  Due to  the  wide  variance  between  the  IPEB’s  unfit
finding  and  recommendation  that  she  be  permanently  retired   with   a
compensable rating of 30 percent and the FPEB’s finding  her  fit  for  duty
and recommendation that she be returned to duty, her case was  presented  to
the  Secretary  of  the  Air  Force  Personnel  Council  (SAFPC)  for  final
resolution.  The SAFPC  concurred  with  the  IPEB  and  the  applicant  was
permanently retired by reason of physical disability effective 26  September
2006, rated at 30  percent.   After  thoroughly  reviewing  the  applicant’s
complete submission, we are not persuaded the decision of the  SAFPC  should
be overturned.  The supporting statements  from  the  applicant’s  chain  of
command are duly noted; however, they do not convince us that  her  clinical
disorder will not continue to prohibit her  utilization  as  a  Total  Force
asset if she is returned to the physical  and  mental  stressors  associated
with military service.  Hence, we agree with the opinion and  recommendation
of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt  it’s  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.

________________________________________________________________

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-2006-02758
in Executive Session on 30 November 2006, under the provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                       Mr. Wayne R. Gracie, Panel Chair
                       Ms. LeLoy W. Cottrell, Member
                       Mr. Alan A. Blomgren, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 5 Sep 06, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 25 Sep 06, w/atch.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Oct 06.




                                   WAYNE R. GRACIE
                                   Panel Chair