RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00068
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 14 July 2008
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
She receive another review of her medical evaluation board evaluation
(MEB).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
She should be allowed another MEB review because her medical records were
lost and not available for review by the Secretary of the Air Force
Personnel Council (SAFPC).
Applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force (RegAF) on 23 May 1994.
On 22 June 2006, the applicant underwent a medical evaluation board (MEB)
for asthma and cold urticaria. They recommended the applicant be returned
to duty.
On 9 August 2006, an Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) convened and
recommended the applicant be discharged with severance pay with a 10
percent disability rating. On 14 August 2006, the applicant did not agree
with the findings and recommendation of the IPEB.
On 1 September 2006, a Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB) convened and
recommended the applicant be discharged from the Air Force for asthma and
cold urticaria with severance pay and a 20 percent disability rating. On 1
September 2006, the applicant nonconcurred with the findings and
recommendation of the FPEB.
On 31 October 2006, the applicant’s case was forwarded to the Secretary of
the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC). On 14 November 2006, the
Secretary Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) reviewed the applicant’s file
and directed the applicant be discharged with severance pay with a 20
percent disability rating.
On 2 January 2007, the applicant was discharged in the grade of staff
sergeant with severance pay with a 20 percent disability rating. She
served 12 years 7 months and 10 days of military service.
____________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPDS recommends the requested relief be denied. They state the
applicant has not provided any new medical documentation for review by the
Board to support her request to have the decision overturned.
A copy of the AFPC/DPPDS 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 9
February 2007 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 an injustice. Applicant’s contentions are duly
noted; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air
Force and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the
applicant has not been the victim of an error or an injustice. The
applicant’s records reflect a medical board was convened and she was
diagnosed with asthma and cold-induced urticaria. On 9 August 2006, she
was evaluated by the IPEB which recommended she be discharged with
severance pay with a 10 percent disability rating and on 1 September 2006,
the FPEB reviewed the applicant’s complete medical board package and
medical records and determined the applicant’s cold-induced urticaria
warranted a 20 percent disability rating. The applicant did not concur
with the FPEB and submitted an appeal to the SAFPC. On 14 November 2006,
SAFPC
concurred with the IPEB and FPEB and directed the applicant be discharged
with severance pay with a combined disability rating of 20 percent. It is
unfortunate the applicant’s medical records were lost and not available to
SAFPC. However, the Board believes SAFPC’s review of the complete medical
board’s evaluation package was sufficient to make a fair and equitable
decision on the applicant’s case. Moreover, the applicant has not provided
any new medical documentation to warrant another review of her medical
board evaluation. 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2007-
00068 in Executive Session on 10 April 2007 under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
Ms. Josephine L. Davis, Member
Ms. Patricia R. Collins, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, 5 Jan 07.
Exhibit B. Disability Discharge Package.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPDS, dated 5 Feb 07.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Feb 07.
CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-04051
A 3 Dec 99 ice test conducted by a civilian provider concluded that her history of hives was resolved and there was no evidence of urticaria. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant responded with a personal statement and a letter from her primary care physician, a captain at McConnell AFB, KS. However, since the AFBCMR Medical Consultant advises that this...
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 | CY2013 | BC 2013 01109
We note the BCMR Medical Consultant states that had the applicant indeed completed a MEB in 2004 and was found unfit by a PEB, his case would have been referred to SAFPC for a final disposition. In this respect, we note that the applicant in PD2009-00221 was initially referred to the PEB for asthma, mild persistent and found unfit for continued military service and separated with a 10 percent disability rating, whereas in the case before us, there is no evidence the he was unable to perform...
AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00108
Based upon the lack of episodes during the last twelve months of service, the Board considered the appropriate rating to be 0% at the time of separation. The Board therefore has no basis for recommending any additional unfitting conditions for separation rating. I have carefully reviewed the evidence of record and the recommendation of the Board.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03095
On 6 March 2000, the applicant submitted her rebuttal letter to SAFPC requesting a disability retirement, with a compensable disability rating of 40 percent. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: The BCMR Medical Consultant summarized the information contained in the applicant’s personnel and medical records and is of the opinion that the preponderance of the evidence of the record supports a disability rating of 20 percent. A complete...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02027
The BCMR Medical Consultant states that, although the applicant’s asthma may be mild, it has resulted in duty limitations that are not compatible with a fully fit and vital force and poses requirements that the Physical Evaluation Boards and Air Force Personnel Council previously determined to be unreasonable. The Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) reviewed the evidence and testimony presented by the FPEB and IPEB, including service medical record and the medical summary...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-01005
The AFPC/DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit C. The BCMR Medical Consultant is of the opinion that the applicant’s total combined permanent disability percentage should be increased from 40 to 60 percent to reflect the severe nature of his bilateral foot pain, which prevented him from reasonably performing his military duties. In the applicant’s case, the Air Force limited its unfit finding to his bilateral foot condition since that was the only condition limiting the performance of his military...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03444
The member requested a hearing with the Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB). The SAFPC reviewed the findings of both Boards and concurred with the recommendation of the FPEB for discharge with severance pay at a 20 percent disability rating. The DPPD complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 9 Nov 07, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02758
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. Based on the medical evidence and the applicant’s testimony, the FPEB recommended that she be returned to duty. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02816
The FPEB reviewed the evidence presented and recommended discharge with severance pay with a disability rating of 10 percent. Under Title 10, U.S.C., Physical Evaluation Boards must determine if a member’s condition renders them unfit for continued military service relating to their office, grade, rank or rating. The AFPC/DPPD complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air...