RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02555
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her date of separation (DOS) be adjusted by seven months to reflect she completed 20 years of total active service.
In addition, her record be corrected to reflect award of the Defense Meritorious Service Medal (DMSM). (Administratively corrected)
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
When she accepted her Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) findings, she was not fully informed of her options and had no support of any kind to make an informed decision.
If she cannot get her 20 years, then she will lose Concurrent Retirement and Disability Pay (CRDP) from the Department of Veteran Affairs (DVA).
In support of her appeal, the applicant submits a personal statement; a timeline of events; copies of numerous electronic communications; a medical statement; Performance Feedback documentation; Letter of Evaluation; commanders evaluation and recommendation in reference to the Medical Evaluation Board (MEB), applicants rebuttal; Enlisted Performance Reports (EPRs); medical documentation; IPEB findings and recommendation; unsigned award documents; Permanent Disability Retired List (PDRL) orders; Office of the Inspector General response to EPR and award grievance; Data Verification Brief; DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty; and DMSM award documentation.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force. Accordingly, there is no need to recite these facts in this Record of Proceedings.
On 10 September 2010, the applicant was issued a DD Form 215, Correction to DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty; reflecting her award of the DMSM.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSD recommends denial. DPSD states the IPEB reviewed the applicants medical board on 5 May 2000 for diagnosis of Crohns Disease and recommended permanent retirement with a disability rating of 30 percent. On 11 May 2009, the applicant concurred with the recommendation of the IPEB. She was released from active duty effective 27 July 2009 and retired in the grade of master sergeant (E-7) effective 28 July 2009. She served 19 years, 5 months, and 23 days on active duty.
A complete copy of the DPSD evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 10 August 2010 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). 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 an error or an injustice. We note that Air Force office of primary responsibility has administratively corrected the applicants request for the DMSM; therefore, we will only address her request to adjust her date of separation to be eligible for a service retirement. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicants submission, we found no evidence the applicant's records are in error. She provides no evidence to support her request for a length of service adjustment or that she was treated differently from other similarly situated members. Therefore, 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. Accordingly, the applicants request is not favorably considered.
4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.
_________________________________________________________________
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-2010-02555 in Executive Session on 23 February 2011, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered for AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-02555:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 7 Jun 10, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSD, dated 10 Aug 10.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Sep 10.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC 2010 02555 3
On 20 June 2013, the applicant submitted another request for reconsideration of her appeal to correct her DOS to allow her a 20-year active duty retirement or to allow her to return to active duty to complete 20 years of active duty service. A complete copy of the BCMR Medical Consultants evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit G. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Medical Consultant appears to agree with...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-03058
According to a Duty Limiting Condition Report, dated 25 June 2008, she was placed in a Not Present for Duty Status in accordance with Air Force Instruction 48-123, paragraph (A)(2) and Air Force Reserve Command Surgeon General Policy Memorandum 06-01, due to a non- duty related medical condition that required a Worldwide Duty Evaluation (WDE) and evaluation by an MEB or PEB. Further, it must be noted the USAF disability boards must rate disabilities based on the members condition at that...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01183
________________________________________________________________ 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-2010-01976
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSD recommends denial. The complete copy of the BCMR Medical Consultants evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: The applicant states the only surgery she had after her discharge was in the Veterans Hospital to attempt to correct residual damage from a surgery completed while she...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02259
The complete DPSD evaluation is at Exhibit C. The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends the administrative adjustment of the applicant's AF Form 356, Findings and Recommended Disposition of the USAF Physical Evaluation Board, to reflect his thyroid condition was considered by the IPEB, but with denial of its inclusion as an unfitting condition in the military disability rating computation; neither initially or at the time of his removal from the TDRL. The complete BCMR Medical Consultants...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-03494
The DPSD complete evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 8 Apr 11 for review and comment within 30 days. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04276
It appears the applicant is requesting her separation with a 20% disability rating be changed to a medical retirement with a 100% disability rating. On 6 Jun 83, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force with severance pay with a disability rating of 20% On 21 Feb 85, she was discharged from the Air Force Reserve. Also that any future promotions, schooling, or awards could not be added to a DD Form 214 after the close out...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2010-02534
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS She underwent her TDRL re-evaluation in May 09 and the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB), after reviewing the results of the examination, recommended her removal from the TDRL and subsequent disability discharge with a disability rating of ten percent. In her rebuttal to SAFPC, she noted concern with her disability rating and felt that if she was unfit for duty, she should be given a disability rating of 30 percent, or be...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-03087
The OSA has responded well to CPAP. On 4 June 2010, the applicant non-concurred with the IPEB findings and requested a formal hearing with counsel, contending she was unfit for duty and should receive a 30 percent disability rating for her Depression with Anxiety and another 30 percent for migraine headaches for a combined disability rating of 50 percent and a permanent retirement. The FPEB considered her OSA as a condition that could be unfitting but was not currently compensable or...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04826
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSD (USAF Physical Disability Division) recommends denial. The complete DPSD evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Per the Air Force board and her current and former treating and forensic psychiatrists, she does not have a diagnosis of any psychotic or delusional disorder. ...