RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2008-01900
            INDEX CODE:  111.02
      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  His discharge with severance pay  be  changed  to  reflect  a  permanent
disability retirement.

2.  Block 8b, on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or  Discharge  from
Active Duty be changed from Randolph Air Force Base  (AFB)  to  Grand  Forks
AFB.

3.  Block 18, on his DD Form 214, be corrected to reflect the severance  pay
amount he actually received.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:


He waited six months for his DD Form 214 and discovered these  errors.   He
should have been offered a medical retirement as  opposed  to  a  discharge
after serving more than  13  years  on  active  duty.   He  was  improperly
counseled during the separation process and should  have  been  briefed  on
medical retirements.  He was not advised that his total  active  duty  time
could have been calculated with the  percentage  he  was  granted  for  his
injury.


His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 21 Jan 94, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force.

On 4 Apr 07, he was considered by a Medical Evaluation Board  (MEB)  with  a
diagnosis of cervical radiculopathy.  The MEB determined his  condition  was
in the line of duty (LOD) and referred his case  to  the  Informal  Physical
Evaluation Board (IPEB).

On 16 May 07, the IPEB reviewed his case and recommended discharge  with  a
disability rating of 10%.  On 2 Jul 07, he disagreed with the findings  and
subsequently appeared before the Formal Physical  Evaluation  Board  (FPEB)
with counsel.  The FPEB examined the evidence presented at the hearing  and
recommended discharge with a disability rating of 10%.  The FPEB duly noted
his contention that he was fit for return to duty and he testified that his
condition had improved.  The FPEB acknowledged his progress  with  the  new
physical therapy; however, they  did  not  believe  he  was  fully  fit  to
continue his primary duties.

On 13 Jul 07, he disagreed and submitted a rebuttal to  the  Secretary  of
the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) for review.   The  SAFPC  reviewed
the case file with the new evidence and concurred with the disposition  of
the previous boards and upheld the  recommendation  of  discharge  with  a
disability rating of 10%.  The board acknowledged he was able  to  perform
less strenuous administrative duties but his medical  condition  prevented
him from performing the full spectrum of duties for which he was trained.

On 24 Aug 07, the SAFPC determined he was physically unfit  for  continued
military service and directed discharge with severance pay.

On 15 Oct 07, he was discharged with severance pay in the grade  of  staff
sergeant after serving 13 years, 8 months and 25 days on active duty.

HQ AFPC will administratively correct Block 8b,  Station  Where  Separated
and Block 18, Severance Pay Amount, on his DD Form 214.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSD recommends denial.  DPSD  states  “Discharged”  is  the  correct
entry in Block 23 on his DD Form 214 for a person who was approved  for  a
medical separation.  The preponderance of evidence reflects that no  error
or injustice occurred during the disability process.

The complete DPSD 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 18  Jul
08 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this office  has
received no response (Exhibit D).

________________________________________________________________




ADDITIONAL EVALUATION:

The  BCMR  Medical  Consultant  recommends  denial.   The   BCMR   Medical
Consultant states a disability retirement is not granted as a reward for a
service members’ lengthy and honorable service.  Instead the determination
of  medical  retirement   eligibility   is   based   upon   the   clinical
manifestations and functional impairment resulting from one or more  given
medical conditions; then utilizing these findings against  the  disability
rating  criteria  and  guidelines  outlined  in  Veterans   Administration
Schedule  for  Rating  Disabilities  (VASRD)  and  Department  of  Defense
instructions.   Specifically,  in  order   to   qualify   for   retirement
eligibility  the  disability  rating  must  be  a  minimum  of  30%.   Any
disability rating percentages for service-connected medical conditions  or
a combination of conditions that falls below 30%,  by  statue  results  in
discharge with severance pay.  In order for the applicant to have  reached
retirement eligibility for his neck  ailment,  certain  clinical  criteria
must  have  been  met  to  achieve  the  minimum   qualifying   disability
rating.  The applicant’s cervical spine range of motion was  described  as
full.  Therefore, he would not have qualified for  retirement  eligibility
under the range of  motion  criterion.   Secondly,  although  he  reported
radicular symptoms involving his upper  extremity;  the  electrodiagnostic
studies, MRI scan, and myelogram did not demonstrate  evidence  of  direct
nerve root involvement that could  otherwise  justify  a  separate  rating
under 8500 series (neurological disorders).   Consequently,  there  is  no
objectively  identifiable  anatomic  or   physiologic   basis   for   this
description other than the subjective symptoms reported by the  applicant.
Additionally, noting that he had previously aspired to return to duty  and
has shown some level of improvement in his condition (but  not  sufficient
for a return to duty), the BCMR Medical Consultant found no evidence  that
the applicant experienced any episodes of incapacitation of  a  sufficient
duration to  qualify  for  a  medical  retirement  under  the  alternative
disability  rating  criterion.   The  BCMR  Medical  Consultant  finds  no
evidence of  an  error  or  injustice  that  justifies  a  change  of  the
applicants discharge with severance pay to a medical retirement.

The complete BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit E.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE ADDITIONAL EVALUATION:

A copy of the BCMR Medical Consultant’s  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant on 22 Sep 08, for review and comment within 30 days.  As  of  this
date, this office has received no response (Exhibit F).

________________________________________________________________

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 injustice.  Evidence has not been presented which
would lead us to believe that the applicant’s  disability  processing  and
the final disposition of his  case  were  in  error  or  contrary  to  the
governing Air Force regulations, which implement the law.  We  agree  with
the opinions and recommendations  of  the  Air  Force  office  of  primary
responsibility and the BCMR Medical Consultant and adopt  their  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 compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought  in  this
application.

________________________________________________________________

RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not  demonstrate
the existence of 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 BC-2008-01900 in  Executive
Session on 18 Nov 08, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr.  Gregory A. Parker, Panel Chair
                 Mr.  Jeffery R. Shelton, Member
                 Ms.  Karen A. Holloman, Member












The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket  Number  BC-
2008-01900 was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 16 May 08, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Master Military Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSD, dated 29 May 08, w/atch.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Jul 08.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 19 Sep 08.
   Exhibit F.  Letter SAF/MRBR, dated 22 Sep 08.




            GREGORY A. PARKER
            Panel Chair