ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-1989-00234
INDEX CODE: 108.04
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her medical discharge be changed to a medical retirement.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Many of the problems that were presented to the MEB/PEB generated pain and
inhibited activity. The diagnosis was not taken seriously or else the
equipment/expertise was not available at the time. Medical technology and
knowledge has changed and now there is documentation to support her claims
presented to those boards.
In support of her appeal, she has submitted copies of a personal statement
and numerous medical documents pertaining to her medical and surgical
treatments since her release from active duty.
The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit J.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the
applicant’s separation, and the rationale of the earlier decision by the
Board, see the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit I.
On 18 June 2007, the applicant submitted a request for reconsideration,
contending many of the problems presented to the MEB/PEB generated pain and
inhibited activity, the diagnosis was not taken seriously or else the
equipment/expertise was not available at the time, and medical technology
and knowledge has changed.
________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The AFBCMR Medical Consultant is of the opinion that no change in the
records is warranted. By law, a member must have an unfitting condition
prior to discharge from the Air Force in order to be eligible for benefits
from the Air Force Disability Evaluation System (DES). Although the
applicant had a Class III Papanicolau (Pap) smear prior to her discharge,
and this ultimately led to a hysterectomy, there is no evidence presented
that this condition interfered with her ability to perform her duties.
Similarly, there is no evidence presented that her knee and shoulder
conditions were unfitting at the time of her discharge. According to the
Veterans Administration (VA) Schedule for Rating Disabilities, the ranges
of motion presented almost nine years later were not sufficient to warrant
any disability rating above zero percent. Any worsening of her back
condition after discharge cannot be considered by the Air Force DES after
disposition is finalized and she is separated. The Department of Veterans
Affairs is authorized to manage changes in her condition, as appropriate.
The preponderance of the evidence of record shows the applicant’s
conditions were appropriately evaluated. The information submitted for
reconsideration does not significantly change the previous opinion of the
medical advisory of 24 January 1989. Action and disposition in this case
are proper and equitable, reflecting compliance with Air Force directives
that implement the law.
The AFBCMR Medical Consultant’s complete evaluation, with attachment, is at
Exhibit K.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant furnished an addendum addressing the issue of the impact of
the traumas upon the performance of her duties. Although the response only
identifies some limited behaviors, she is willing to be more specific if
the Board requests it. She is undergoing a new cancer work-up which is
taking most of her time and energy.
The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit M.
________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant's
complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree
with the opinion and recommendation of the AFBCMR 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 since there is no evidence
that her medical conditions were unfitting at the time of her discharge.
Further, any worsening of her conditions, after discharge, cannot be
considered by the Air Force DES after disposition is finalized and she is
separated. 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 additional 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-1989-00234
in Executive Session on 1 May 2008, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. James W. Russell, III, Panel Chair
Ms. Jan Mulligan, Member
Mr. Kurt R. LaFrance, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit I. Record of Proceedings, dated 20 Jun 89, w/atchs.
Exhibit J. DD Form 149, dated 18 Jun 07, w/atchs.
Exhibit K. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 3 Sep 07,
w/atch.
Exhibit L. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Sep 07.
Exhibit M. Letter, Applicant, dated 7 Oct 07, w/atchs.
JAMES W. RUSSELL, III
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02390
In support of her request, the applicant provided a personal statement and documents extracted from her military personnel record. At the time the applicant was being evaluated in the Air Force disability evaluation system, her depression and hypothyroidism were not separately unfitting and did not warrant a separate rating from the rating for fatigue. We find no evidence of error in this case and after thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record, we do not believe she has suffered from an...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2005-02390
In support of her request, the applicant provided a personal statement and documents extracted from her military personnel record. At the time the applicant was being evaluated in the Air Force disability evaluation system, her depression and hypothyroidism were not separately unfitting and did not warrant a separate rating from the rating for fatigue. We find no evidence of error in this case and after thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record, we do not believe she has suffered from an...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-00429
He should have been rated for the other injuries (neck and back) that he also sustained in the accident since they were also addressed during his active duty military career. On 18 May 99, the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) found the applicant unfit for further military service due to “status post motor vehicle accident 1994 with residuals, chronic headaches,” and recommended discharge with severance pay with a 10 percent compensable rating. A recommendation by an MEB for...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2002-02301
An MEB was convened on 1 Feb 00 and referred her case to an Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) with a diagnosis of Axis I: somatization disorder, PTSD, chronic and partial remission, depressive disorder not otherwise specified; and Axis II: borderline and paranoid personality traits. Her PTSD represents an existing prior to service condition that in combination with her maladaptive personality traits is significantly responsible for her primary unfitting diagnosis of somatization...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02827
The fact that a person may have a medical condition does not mean that the condition is unfitting for continued military service. In the medical Consultant’s view, the preponderance of evidence of the record shows that the applicant’s scoliosis condition existed prior to service, and that her back pain was the natural progression of the condition. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and recommendations...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00029
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00029 INDEX CODE: 110.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 3 JUL 08 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be changed to show she served a full 20 years of active service; or, she be reinstated back into the military to...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02292
The FPEB reviewed his case and recommended permanent retirement with a 30 percent disability rating. Further, it must be noted that the service disability boards must rate disabilities based on the individual's condition at the time of evaluation. AFPC/DPPD'S complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states the evaluation stated he wanted his disability rating changed from...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00704
Records reflect that based on the applicant’s condition of Chronic Constipation and Abdominal Pain, a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) convened to consider her case. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that her discharge prior to the final disposition of her medical case was of such severity to warrant her general discharge being set aside. The applicant points to the Disability Operations Branch (AFPC/DPPD) letter advising...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03326
The BCMR Medical Consultant states the applicant experienced approximately four episodes of loss of consciousness (syncope) while on active duty diagnosed as seizure disorder leading to disability discharge. The cardiology evaluation concluded her episodes of syncope in service were due to vaso-depressor syncope. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, it is our opinion that given the circumstances surrounding her separation from the Air Force,...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03169
Disability processing records reveal a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) was initiated on 17 Jun 03, and the results was referred to the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) which ultimately recommended she be discharged with entitlement to disability severance pay with a 10 percent disability rating. Because her disability rating was rated less than 30 percent disabling, she was not eligible for a disability retirement under the provision of Title 10, USC, Section 1201. Based on a...