Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-03166
Original file (BC-2008-03166.doc) Auto-classification: Denied


                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2008-03166
            INDEX CODE:  108.07
            COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His current retirement order be changed  to  reflect  that  his  injury  was
combat-related.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was diagnosed with schizophrenia subsequent to a deployment to Fort  Dix,
New Jersey.  He  believes  that  his  medical  condition  is  combat-related
because it was incurred while he was deployed to Fort Dix to participate  in
an exercise.  His retirement  order  should  reflect  that  his  injury  was
combat-related.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant served in the Regular Air Force for 13 years,       5  months,
and 16 days.

On 29 March 2007, a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) forwarded his case to  an
Informal  Physical   Evaluation   Board   (IPEB)   with   a   diagnosis   of
schizophrenia.

On 1 May 2007,  the  IPEB  found  him  unfit  for  duty  with  a  30 percent
permanent disability rating.  It was  determined  that  his  disability  was
incurred in the line of duty, not the direct result of an armed conflict  or
a combat-related injury.

On 7 May 2007, the applicant's mother disagreed with  the  findings  of  the
IPEB and requested a Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB).

On 20 July 2007, the FPEB agreed with the findings of  the  IPEB  and  found
him unfit for duty with a 30 percent disability rating.

On  10  September  2007,  SAF/MRBP  (SAF  Personnel  Council)  conducted   a
supplemental review of the IPEB and FPEB findings  and  concurred  with  the
recommendation to  permanently  retire  the  applicant  with  a  30  percent
disability rating.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSD recommends denial.  DPSD states that block 10D on  his  retirement
order was correctly annotated with the word NO, reflecting that  his  injury
was not combat-related.  Per AFR 35-4, (Physical Evaluation  for  Retention,
Retirement, and Separation) in order for his retirement order to be  combat-
related the service member would  have  had  to  have  been  assigned  to  a
military occupation entitling him to hazardous duty pay and there is  enough
evidence of  record  to  show  that  extremely  hazardous  duty  factor  was
present.  The FPEB determined that  his  condition  was  not  combat-related
thus there was no error or injustice when his disability or  retirement  was
processed.

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  19
September 2008 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  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  Air  Force  office  of  primary
responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion  that
the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  We find  no
evidence that places the applicant  in  a  combat  or  hazardous  situation;
therefore, we cannot  determine  that  his  injury  was,  in  fact,  combat-
related.  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 AFBCMR Docket Number  BC-2008-
03166 in Executive Session on 5 November 2008, under the provisions  of  AFI
36-2603:


            Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
      Mr. Garry G. Sauner, Member
      Mrs. Lea Gallogly, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 6 August 2008, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSD, dated 10 September 2008.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 September 2008.




                                   CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03284

    Original file (BC-2007-03284.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 15 Dec 63, the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Counsel (SAFPC) reviewed his rebuttal to the FPEB findings and concurred with the IPEB's recommendation. The VA disability rating code initially utilized in 1963 by the PEB was reportedly 9203, indicating "Schizophrenia, paranoid type," and VA rating code 9208 was utilized in the final PEB action, depicting a "Delusional Disorder." The complete BCMR Medical Consultant's evaluation is at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03444

    Original file (BC-2007-03444.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2008 | BC 2008 03855

    Original file (BC 2008 03855.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-03855 INDEX CODE: 108.07 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His record be corrected to show he completed 20 years of active duty and his disability retirement changed to a longevity retirement so he can qualify for benefits under the Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) Act or for...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC 2007 03664

    Original file (BC 2007 03664.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-03664 INDEX CODE: 108.00 COUNSEL: XXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His disability retirement be corrected to show that his medical condition was “the direct result of armed conflict or was caused by an instrumentality of war and incurred in the line of duty during a period of war," or was...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02816

    Original file (BC-2007-02816.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01183

    Original file (BC-2010-01183.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Her injury to the neck was caused by her Interceptor Body Armor (IBA), incurred while engaged in hazardous service and/or was a direct result of combat. ________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSD recommends denial, stating, in part, a preponderance of evidence reflects no error or injustice occurred during the disability process or at the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01670

    Original file (BC-2010-01670.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01670 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His status be changed from non-combat related to combat related. DPSD states that a preponderance of evidence reflects that no error or injustice occurred during the disability process or at the time his of retirement. Upon review of the narrative...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00677

    Original file (BC-2007-00677.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant disagreed with the IPEB findings and requested a Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB). FPEB findings, dated 5 July 1991, found the applicant’s condition was stable and recommended permanent disability retirement at seventy (70) percent. After a thorough review of the available evidence of record, it is our opinion that the service-connected medical conditions that resulted in the applicant’s disability retirement were not combat-related or through an instrumentality of war.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2011-05034

    Original file (BC-2011-05034.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Following a review of all available facts and evidence in the case, to include the testimony presented before the FPEB, the remarks by 2 the FPEB, IPEB, the service medical record, and the narrative summary of the MEB, the board concurred with the disposition recommended by the two previous boards and recommended discharge with severance pay with a combined disability rating of 20 percent. DPSD states no documentation was provided at any time during the DES processing of the applicant’s...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00068

    Original file (BC-2007-00068.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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). ____________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPDS recommends the requested relief...