RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-02006
INDEX CODE: 108.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His records be corrected to show he was medically retired.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He did not fully comprehend the ramifications of his concurrence with the
recommendations of the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) at the time of his
discharge. He did not understand the long-term implication and difference
between a discharge and a retirement. He was treated for several other
combat-related injuries and illnesses. He tried to include them in his PEB
but was advised by the Disability Branch to accept the PEB findings and
submit a request for correction of his records after separation.
In support of his request, the applicant submits copies of his Department
of Veteran Affairs Rating Decision and extracts from his medical records.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 24 Jun 03. He was
progressively promoted to the grade of senior airman having assumed that
grade effective and with a date of rank of 8 Dec 05. On 12 Dec 08, he was
honorably discharged for disability and received severance pay. He served
5 years, 5 months and 19 days on active duty.
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from
the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letters prepared by
the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibits C and D.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPSD recommends denial. DPSD states the applicant was released
from active duty service for diagnoses of chronic low back pain with
radiation to left thigh, with mild L5-S1 intervertebral disc degenerative
changes. The Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) also determined the
disability was the direct result of armed conflict or was caused by an
instrumentality of war; incurred in the line of duty during a period of war
and was the direct result of a combat-related injury. The IPEB recommended
the applicant’s discharge with severance pay with a disability rating of 10
percent. The applicant concurred with the findings and a separation date
of 12 Dec 08 was established. The applicant did not request a Formal
Physical Evaluation Board hearing nor did he apply for limited assignment
status in order to remain on active duty.
The complete DPSD evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
BCMR Medical Consultant’s Evaluation:
The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial. The Medical Consultant
states the Military Disability Evaluation System (MDES), can only, by law,
offer compensation for the specific medical conditions that are/were the
cause for career termination and then only to the degree of severity
present at the “snap-shot” in time at final disposition. The Medical
Consultant opines it was the applicant’s chronic low back pain which
terminated his career.
The Rating Decision rendered by the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA)
granted the applicant a 30 percent disability rating for Patelleofemoral
Syndrome, a 30 percent rating for an Adjustment Disorder, a 10 percent
rating for lumbar sacral strain with intermittent radiculopathy, and a 10
percent disability rating for Gastreoesophageal Reflux Disease; however,
the Medical Consultant finds no evidence of record that any of these
conditions (except for his back ailment) adversely impacted his ability to
perform military service or would have/should have independently been the
cause for terminating his career.
Adjustment Disorder falls under a category of non-compensable mental
disorders that, if significantly interfering with the applicant’s ability
to perform military service, could have resulted in an involuntary
discharge, but not for his somatic ailments. Additionally, based on the
mental health assessment conducted in conjunction with his MEB, there was
no evidence of a diagnosable Axis I or Axis II mental disorder.
The DVA operates under a different set of laws and is authorized to offer
compensation for any medical condition determined service-incurred or
aggravated, without regard to its proven or demonstrated impact upon a
service member’s retainability or ability to perform military service.
The complete BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE AND BCMR MEDICAL CONSULTANT’S EVALUATIONS:
Copies of the Air Force and BCMR Medical Consultant evaluations were
forwarded to the applicant on 6 Nov 09 for review and comment within 30
days. As of this date, this office has received no response (Exhibit E).
_________________________________________________________________
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. The applicant’s contentions are duly
noted; however, in our opinion, the detailed comments provided by the Air
Force office of primary responsibility and the BCMR Medical Consultant
adequately address these allegations. Therefore, we are in complete
agreement with the comments and recommendations of these offices and adopt
their rationale as the basis for our decision that the applicant has not
been the victim of either an error or injustice; therefore, we find no
basis to recommend granting the relief sought.
_________________________________________________________________
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 BC-2009-02006 in
Executive Session on 30 Mar 10, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Vice Chair
Member
Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 26 May 09, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSD, dated 12 Aug 09.
Exhibit D. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 3 Nov 09.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Nov 09.
Vice Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04514
The IPEB reviewed his case and found the applicant unfit for continued military and recommended discharge with severance pay with a disability rating of 10 percent for a diagnosis of Anxiety Disorder, NOS. The complete DPSD evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He does not understand how his PTSD diagnosis would be blatantly ignored when two separate professional mental health...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-02261
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The medical board determined that her disability resulted from her military service; however, this was not reflected on her discharge paperwork. On 18 Apr 03, the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) found the applicant unfit for further service and recommended her discharge under other than Chapter 61, Title 10 United States Code (USC) at the rating of 10 percent, but without compensation (as...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-03027
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the evaluation prepared by the BCMR Medical Consultant, which is attached at Exhibit C. ___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends the applicant’s name be placed on the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL), with a 50 percent disability rating, for anxiety disorder, under Veterans Administrative Schedule for Rating Disabilities...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC 2011 03032
Further, it must be noted that the service disability boards must rate disabilities based on the individual's condition at the time of evaluation. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSD evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The evidence indicates at the time of the IPEB the applicant had not received a diagnosis for a personality disorder. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and the...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03032
Further, it must be noted that the service disability boards must rate disabilities based on the individual's condition at the time of evaluation. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSD evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The evidence indicates at the time of the IPEB the applicant had not received a diagnosis for a personality disorder. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and the...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2008-02939
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the BCMR Medical Consultant at Exhibit H. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFRC/A1K defers to the appropriate office in regards to the applicant’s request for a medical retirement. His left knee injury was recorded as occurring “while in college.” He received periodic non-flying medical...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-00001
He be retired for length of service with an effective date of 15 Feb 99 versus receiving a permanent disability retirement. He would have continued in the Air Force had it not been for receiving a medical retirement. The DPSOR complete advisory is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In a five page rebuttal, the applicants counsel states the USAF Physical Disability Divisions advisory opinion is not accurate.
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-01824
JA opines the possibility that the member’s attempt to add the sleep apnea to the MEB delayed the process; however, it is unclear how the LOD board’s subsequent finding of EPTS might have impacted the MEB process. Her complete response is at Exhibit F. _________________________________________________________________ BCMR MEDICAL CONSULTANT EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends medically retiring the deceased service member with a 30 percent disability rating, effective 24 Jan...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00066
While the applicant's request for 60% rating is not recommended, the 40% rating is medically appropriate. The complete BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 3 September 2010 for review and comment within 30 days. We note the comments from the Air Force office of primary...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00285
If all the facts and unfitting disabling conditions were justly considered, he would have been medically retired at 100 percent. The IPEB noted “you have been unable to perform Security Forces duties since 2007 due to limitations resulting from your continued bilateral knee pain.” On 14 Apr 09, the applicant non-concurred with the findings and recommended disposition of the IPEB and requested a formal 2 hearing with counsel. Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 1332.38, Physical...