RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04392 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

1. Her disability rating be increased to 50 percent. 

 

2. She be given a disability retirement in lieu of her 
disability separation with severance pay. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

She should be given a medical retirement. She was originally 
separated for asthma, but is now rated as service connected by 
the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) as 50 percent disabled. 

 

In support of her request, the applicant provides a copy of her 
DVA rating decision and what appears to be a screen shot 
indicating the ratings for her various service-connected 
disabilities. 

 

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit A. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant’s military personnel records indicate that she 
served in the Regular Air Force in the grade of staff sergeant 
(E-5), effective and with a date of rank of 1 Dec 01. 

 

On 7 Dec 07, the applicant was found unfit for military service 
due to her diagnosis of asthma by the Informal Physical 
Evaluation Board (IPEB) and was recommended for discharge with 
separation pay with a combined compensable rating of ten 
percent. She appealed the ruling to the Formal Physical 
Evaluation Board (FPEB) which, after considering all the facts 
and evidence, upheld the IPEB recommendation for a disability 
discharge with a compensable rating of ten percent for asthma. 

 


On 4 Feb 08, officials within the Office of the Secretary of the 
Air Force determined the applicant was physically unfit for 
continued military service and directed her honorable discharge 
with severance pay, effective 17 Mar 08. 

 

On 10 Mar 08, the applicant’s physical evaluation board case was 
reviewed in accordance with the provisions of the 2008 National 
Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and her rating was determined 
to be accurate and in accordance with the Veteran’s 
Administration Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). 

 

On 17 Mar 08, the applicant was honorably discharged from the 
Air Force for physical disability, with a disability rating of 
ten percent, and was credited with 12 years, 1 month, and ten 
days of total active service. 

 

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of 
the Air Force which are attached at Exhibits C and E. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSD recommends denial indicating the preponderance of 
evidence indicates that no error or injustice occurred during 
the applicant’s disability processing. The Department of 
Defense (DoD) and Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) 
disability evaluation systems operate under separate laws and 
serve two separate and distinct purposes. Under Title 10, 
United States Code (USC), 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 fact that a person may have a medical 
condition does not mean the condition is unfitting for continued 
military service. To be unfitting, the condition must be such 
that it alone precludes the member from fulfilling their 
military duties. If the Board renders a finding of unfit, the 
law provides appropriate compensation due to the premature 
termination of their career. Further, it must be noted that 
USAF disability boards must rate disabilities based on a 
member’s condition at the time of evaluation; in essence a 
snapshot of their condition at that time. On the other hand, it 
is the charge of the DVA, to pick up where the Air Force must, 
by law, leave off. Under Title 38, USC, the DVA may rate any 
service-connected condition, regardless of its impact on the 
member’s ability to perform their military duties, based upon 
future employability or reevaluate based on changes in the 
severity of a condition. This often results in different 
ratings by the two agencies. In the applicant’s case, the DVA 
originally gave her a 30 percent rating for sleep apnea with 
asthma, but later increased the rating for this condition to 
50 percent. However, the member was not processed through the 


military disability evaluation system for the condition of sleep 
apnea, nor did it cause the premature termination of her career. 

A complete copy of the AFPC/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 23 Dec 10 for review and comment within 30 days. 
As of this date, no response has been received by this office 
(Exhibit D). 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial, indicating the 
applicant has not met the burden of proof of an error or 
injustice. The evidence of record indicates that her 
compensable disability rating of ten percent for asthma was 
appropriate to the circumstances and consistent with her 
symptoms of exercise induced asthma at the time of her 
separation. It is important to note the DVA is authorized to 
offer compensation for any medical condition determined to be 
service incurred or aggravated, regardless of its impact upon a 
service member’s fitness to serve, the reason for separation, or 
the intervening period between the discharge and the DVA’s 
examination and determination. That is to say, any symptom or 
set of symptoms that can be attributed to a veteran’s military 
service, whether or not they are clinically significant or 
unfitting for service, may later be determined service incurred 
and compensation provided by the DVA. Unlike the determinations 
conducted by a military department under Title 10, USC which are 
a snapshot in time, the DVA operates under Title 38, USC, which 
authorizes periodic re-evaluations for the purpose of adjusting 
the disability rating(s) awarded as the severity of a given 
medical condition may vary (improve or worsen) over the lifetime 
of the veteran. This explains the common occurrence of a new 
clinical diagnosis, obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in this case, 
made sometimes months or years after military service, but one 
which a DVA examiner has attributed to a set of symptoms 
displayed during military service. There is also no evidence 
provided showing the applicant suffered from OSA during her 
military service or that it interfered with her ability to 
perform her duties to the extent to cause her release from 
military service. In the end, the source of the applicant’s 
unfitness for service, and cause of her disability separation, 
was her asthma, and not her bronchitis or OSA. 

 

A complete copy of the AFBCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is 
at Exhibit E. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 


 

 

 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

A copy of the additional Air Force evaluation was forwarded to 
the applicant on 28 Mar 11 for review and comment within 30 
days. As of this date, no response has been received by this 
office (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. We took 
notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the 
merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and 
recommendations of the Air Force office of primary 
responsibility and AFBCMR Medical Consultant and adopt their 
rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not 
been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, in the 
absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to 
recommend granting the relief sought in this application. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: 

 

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the 
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2010-04392 in Executive Session on 26 Jul 11, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2010-04392 was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 17 Nov 10, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSD, dated 2 Dec 10. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Dec 10. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, 

 dated 22 Mar 11. 

 Exhibit F. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Mar 11. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair