RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:            DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-02940
                             INDEX CODE:  108.00
                             COUNSEL:  NONE
                                                   HEARING DESIRED:
NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her discharge be  changed  from  a  medical  separation  to  permanent
disability retirement with full retirement benefits at the rank of  E-
8, retroactive to her date of separation.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She is entitled to a permanent disability retirement based on law.

In support  of  her  application  the  applicant  submitted  documents
extracted from her Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA)  and  military
medical records and documents extracted from  her  military  personnel
records.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant contracted her initial enlistment in the Regular  Air  Force
on 3 Nov 87.

On 31 Jan 05,  she  underwent  a  Medical  Evaluation  Board  and  was
referred to an  Informal  Physical  Evaluation  Board  (IPEB)  with  a
diagnosis  of  bilateral  hearing  loss.   On  16 Feb  05,  the   IPEB
recommended discharge with severance pay with a disability  rating  of
zero percent.  On 22 Feb 05, she concurred with the  findings  of  the
IPEB.  She was honorably discharged with disability severance pay on 4
Apr 05.

On 8 Sep 05, the DVA awarded her a combined disability  rating  of  40
percent.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The AFBCMR Medical Consultant is of the opinion that a change  in  the
applicant’s records is warranted to reflect a disability rating of  30
percent with a permanent disability retirement.

The Medical Consultant states the Veterans Administration Schedule for
Rating Disabilities (VASRD) uses  a  complex  formula  of  charts  and
tables to determine disability ratings for hearing loss that considers
the audiogram results along with speech discrimination testing.  On 19
Jan 05, she had an average hearing loss in the right ear of  73.75  dB
and 66.25 dB in the left ear with a speech discrimination score of  76
percent on the right and 85 percent on the left.  This calculates to a
grade V designation for the right and ear and  a  grade  III  for  the
left.  The level of grade designation  is  based  a  VASRD  table  and
correlates to a 10 percent disability rating.   The  decision  of  the
IPEB to award a zero percent rating was supported by the  evidence  in
the record and the application of the rules and tables outlined in the
VASRD.  While  the  IPEB  stated  that  her  spec  discrimination  was
“significantly improved,” her condition still would have  rated  a  10
percent disability rating, using the applicable VASRD ratings charts.

Based on the audiogram findings alone (using a different VASRD table),
her designations would be a grade VI for the right ear and a  grade  V
on the left, correlating to a  20  percent  disability  rating.   This
calculation (disregarding the speech discrimination evaluation) is  to
be used when there are language difficulties or  inconsistent  scores.
Paragraph  4.86  of  the  VASRD,  Exceptional  Patterns   of   Hearing
Impairment, states when the puretone threshold at  each  of  the  four
specified frequencies is 55 decibels or more,  the  rating  specialist
will determine the Roman number  designation  for  hearing  impairment
from either the combined audiogram and speech discrimination table  or
the audiogram table alone, whichever results in  the  higher  numeral.
Therefore a 20  percent  rating  was  the  most  appropriate  for  the
applicant at the time of her MEB.

It appears she crossed over the level of hearing loss that would merit
disability discharge sometime between  her  last  USAF  hearing  test,
conducted three  months  before  her  discharge  and  her  VA  hearing
evaluation, conducted three months after her discharge.  It  would  be
impossible to assess accurately what her rating would have been at the
point of discharge.  Utilizing a “straight line  calculation”  of  the
estimated worsening of her condition, the  estimated  average  hearing
loss at the time of discharge would calculate to 76.98 dB on the right
and 71.22 dB on the left.  This would place her in group VII  and  VI,
correlating to a 30 percent disability rating.  There is  no  evidence
of any specific event that would have suddenly worsened her condition.

Disability adjudicators based their  ratings  decisions  on  the  last
available test results.  The VA Audiology  testing  was  conducted  so
close to her discharge,  the  medical  consultant  believes  that  the
benefit of the doubt should be given to the applicant.   The  complete
AFBCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 27 Jul 07, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to  the
applicant for review and response within 30 days.  As of this date, no
response has been received by this office (Exhibit D).

_________________________________________________________________

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSDD recommends granting discharge with severance pay with a ten
percent disability  rating.   DPSDD  states  based  on  the  available
information at the time the applicant’s medical package  was  reviewed
by the IPEB, her condition  did  not  reach  the  level  to  meet  the
criteria for a rating of permanent disability  retirement.   The  IPEB
reviewed the advisory from the AFBCMR Medical Consultant   and  opines
that it cannot be determined if the  applicant’s  hearing  loss  would
have been a linear progression, and  feels  their  recommendation  for
discharge  with  severance  pay  was  accurate.   Additionally,  DPSDD
acknowledges that an additional 10 percent disability rating  for  her
previously unrated condition of tinnitus is warranted  in  this  case.
The complete AFPC/DPSDD evaluation is at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 7 Dec 07, a  copy  of  the  additional  Air  Force  evaluation  was
forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days.  As
of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit G)

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.    The applicant has exhausted all remedies  provided  by  existing
law or regulations.

2.    The application was timely filed.

3.    Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented  to  demonstrate
the existence of an injustice warranting  corrective  action.   Noting
the differing  opinions  between  the  Air  Force  office  of  primary
responsibility  and  the  AFBCMR  Medical  Consultant  regarding   the
appropriate rating for her hearing loss, we are inclined to agree with
the AFBCMR Medical  Consultant's  recommendation  in  this  particular
instance.  In this regard, the applicant's most recent audiogram  that
was used to determine her level of hearing loss at the time  of  final
disposition of her case was conducted approximately 75 days  prior  to
her discharge.  An audiogram conducted shortly after separation showed
a significant worsening of her condition.  As suggested by the  AFBCMR
Medical Consultant, because of the lapse  of  time  between  her  last
audiogram  and  her  separation  date,  it  would  be  impossible   to
accurately determine at which point her hearing loss reached the level
warranting a 30  percent  disability  rating.   Thus,  we  agree  that
reasonable doubt has been  established  as  to  the  accuracy  of  her
hearing assessment upon her discharge and it is our opinion  that  the
benefit of any doubt in the matter should be resolved  in  her  favor.
Noting the Air Force  Physical  Disability  Division's  acknowledgment
that an additional rating of 10 percent  for  her  previously  unrated
condition of tinnitus is warranted, it is our opinion that her records
should be corrected to show that she was retired from  the  Air  Force
with a combined disability rating of 40  percent.   According  to  the
applicable Air Force Instruction, which implements the  provisions  of
10 U.S.C., Section 1372, because the  applicant  had  been  previously
selected for promotion to the grade of senior  master  sergeant,  upon
her retirement for disability reasons she should be advanced  to  that
grade.  Accordingly, we recommend the applicant's records be corrected
to the extent indicated below.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the  Department  of  the  Air  Force
relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that:

      a.    On 3 April 2005, she was found unfit to perform the duties
of  her  office,  rank,  grade,  or  rating  by  reason  of   physical
disability, incurred while she was entitled to receive basic pay; that
the diagnosis in his case was sensorineural hearing loss,  VASRD  code
6100, rated at 30 percent and tinnitus, VASRD code 6260, rated  at  10
percent; with a combined rating of 40 percent;  that  the  compensable
percentage  was  40  percent;  that  the  degree  of  impairment   was
permanent; that the disability was not due to  intentional  misconduct
or willful neglect; that the disability  was  not  incurred  during  a
period of unauthorized  absence;  and  that  the  disability  was  not
received in the line of duty as a direct result of armed  conflict  or
caused by an instrumentality of war.

      b.    On 4 April  2005  she  was  honorably  discharged  and  on
5 April 2005 she was retired in the grade of senior master sergeant by
reason of physical disability under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-3212,
rather than discharged with disability severance pay.

      c.    On 4 April 2005, she elected  spouse  and  child  coverage
under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) based on full retired pay.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2006-02940 in Executive Session on 22 Jan 08, under the provisions  of
AFI 36-2603:

                       Mr. Laurence M. Groner, Panel Chair
                       Mr. Grover L. Dunn, Member
                       Mr. James A. Wolffe, Member

All members  voted  to  correct  the  records,  as  recommended.   The
following documentary evidence, pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2006-02940 was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 15 Sep 05, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, dated 24 Jul 07.
      Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Jul 07.
      Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 4 Sep 07.
      Exhibit F. Letter, APPC/DPSDD, dated 2 Nov 07.
      Exhibit G. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Dec 07.




                             LAURENCE M. GRONER
                             Panel Chair







AFBCMR BC-2006-02940





MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

      Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air
Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority
of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is
directed that:

      The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air
Force relating to            , be corrected to show that:

      a.  On 3 April 2005, she was found unfit to perform the duties
of her office, rank, grade, or rating by reason of physical
disability, incurred while she was entitled to receive basic pay; that
the diagnosis in his case was sensorineural hearing loss, VASRD code
6100, rated at 30 percent and tinnitus, VASRD code 6260, rated at 10
percent; with a combined rating of 40 percent; that the compensable
percentage was 40 percent; that the degree of impairment was
permanent; that the disability was not due to intentional misconduct
or willful neglect; that the disability was not incurred during a
period of unauthorized absence; and that the disability was not
received in the line of duty as a direct result of armed conflict or
caused by an instrumentality of war.

      b.  On 4 April 2005 she was honorably discharged and on 5 April
2005 she was retired in the grade of senior master sergeant by reason
of physical disability under the provisions of AFI 36-3212, rather
than discharged with disability severance pay.

      c.  On 4 April 2005, she elected spouse and child coverage under
the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) based on full retired pay.




                       JOE G. LINEBERGER
                       Director
                       Air Force Review Boards Agency