Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04721
Original file (BC-2010-04721.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04721 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His disallowed Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance Traumatic 
Injury Protection (TSGLI) claims be reconsidered. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He was wounded in Baghdad, Iraq, when a dual-array Improvised 
Explosive Device (IED) struck his vehicle. He received a severe 
concussion, Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI), Post Traumatic Stress 
Disorder (PTSD), back and neck injuries (as well as fractured 
teeth, loss of hearing, and injury to nose/sinuses). His care 
for the first 18 plus months was disjointed and confused as there 
was no single point of contact for his care resulting in a 
dysfunctional and confused level of care. He was not enrolled in 
the Air Force Wounded Warrior Program (AFW2P) until March 2009, 
nearly two years after incurring his injuries; which resulted in 
his lack of awareness of the facilities, programs, options, and 
assets available. 

 

His records underwent a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) on 
15 March 2009, which indicated that he should not be returned to 
duty. On 14 May 2009, his records were evaluated by an Informal 
Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB), which recommended he be placed 
on the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) with a 90 percent 
disability rating. 

 

He filed his first TSGLI claim for TBI in April 2009 and the 
second claim for inability to perform Activities of Daily Living 
(ADLs) in August 2009. His claims were subsequently denied. 
However, he feels his two claims meet the TSGLI eligibility 
requirements. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides a personal 
statement, and copies of Temporary Duty (TDY) orders, electronic 
communications, TSGLI denial letter, excerpt of TSGLI claim, 
Purple Heart Medal citation, Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) 
letter, medical records, and a Defense Finance and Accounting 
Service (DFAS) letter. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force who was 
relieved from active duty effective 13 October 2009 and placed on 
the TDRL effective 14 October 2009 in the grade of colonel (O-6), 
with a 90 percent compensable disability rating. 

 

The remaining relevant facts, extracted from the applicant’s 
master military personnel records, are contained in the Air Force 
evaluation at Exhibit B. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

ARPC/DPWC recommends denial (advisory opinion dated 8 February 
2011). DPWC states that based on the eligibility criteria 
outlined in the TSGLI Procedures Guide, Version 2.4, dated 
23 November 2010, and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act 
for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief, 
2205,(Public Law 109-13), the applicant’s claimed losses, in both 
TSGLI claims, do not meet the TSGLI eligibility criteria for 
payment. 

 

DPWC indicates that upon receipt of the applicant’s appeal, a 
thorough review of both of his claims was conducted. His claim 
for loss of hearing did not meet the criteria for hearing loss as 
the Audiologist’s report states the applicant’s air and bone 
conduction testing revealed hearing within normal limits 
bilaterally for frequencies through 2000 megahertz. His claim 
under hospitalization did not meet eligibility criteria because 
he was seen as an outpatient. 

 

The applicant’s second claim was for inability to perform ADLs 
(bathe, dress, transfer) due to Other Traumatic Injury (OTI) for 
at least 30 consecutive days. However, the loss must have 
occurred within 730 days from the traumatic event. The date of 
the applicant’s traumatic event was 28 April 2007. The cited ADL 
dates were from 1 July 2009 through 5 August 2009. 
Unfortunately, the cited loss does not meet the prescribed period 
as defined by the regulation. 

 

DPWC (additional advisory opinion dated 24 June 2011) states that 
while evaluating the applicant appeal, he simultaneously 
submitted an appeal package to AFPC/DPWCS and enclosed a third 
claim for the same traumatic event. On 11 March 2011, upon 
receipt of the needed medical documentation, their office 


requested the Air Force medical representatives (USAF-SAM/OEHT), 
make an assessment of the claim. They concluded the applicant 
does meet the TSGLI eligibility criteria for the inability to 
perform ADLs for at least 30 days due to OTI. Additionally, they 
further stated that “there is no evidence to suggest loss of 2 or 
more ADLs beyond 30 consecutive days.” Based on this evaluation, 
the applicant was approved for payment of $25,000 for the 
inability to perform two or more ADLs as a result of the surgery 
on 1 November 2007 due to the direct result of the traumatic 
event on 28 April 2007. 

 

The complete DPWC evaluations, with attachments, are at Exhibit 
C. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

In response to the 8 February 2011 DPWC evaluation, the applicant 
indicates he understands the gravity of the Board’s task and 
realizes there is no true black and white answer to his problem; 
however, he asks that the Board apply a modicum of common sense 
to this issue. He is currently having a therapeutic pool 
installed at his house for aquatic therapy to allow his continued 
rehabilitation at home, as the Veteran Affairs treatment center 
is one and a half hours away and his out-of-pocket costs for 
local therapy is costing him approximately $150 plus per month, 
not including cost of transportation. The TSGLI funds would go 
toward offsetting some of the pool’s cost. 

 

The applicant’s complete rebuttal, with attachments, is at 
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 error or injustice in regard to the 
applicant’s claim for TSLGI compensation for hearing loss. After 
reviewing the evidence of record, we note the applicant’s appeal 
of his claim for inability to perform ADLs for at least 
30 consecutive days was approved. Therefore, we will only 
address his request for TSLGI compensation for hearing loss. In 
that regard, we note that according to the Audiologist’s report, 
the applicant’s bone conduction test revealed hearing within 
normal limits bilaterally for frequencies through 2000 megahertz; 


therefore, his claim for hearing loss did not meet the criteria 
for TSGLI compensation. The applicant has provided no evidence 
showing that the Audiologist’s report is in error or invalid. 
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no 
basis to recommend granting relief. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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-2010-04721 in Executive Session on 8 September 2011, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Vice Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered in connection 
with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-04721: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 14 Oct 10, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPWC, dated 24 Jun 11. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 Apr 11. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 12 May 11, w/atchs. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Vice Chair 

 

 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00095

    Original file (BC-2011-00095.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    His claim also qualifies for a loss of Activities of Daily Living (ADL) compensation, as his injuries involved a traumatic brain injury (TBI). The applicant’s complete submission was thoroughly reviewed and his contentions were duly noted; however, no evidence has been presented that convinces us the applicant met the eligibility criteria for traumatic injury protection under the TSGLI program. Therefore, we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force office of primary...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02007

    Original file (BC 2014 02007 .txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The criteria for ADL loss as it is defined in the TSGLI procedures Guide follows: A member is considered to have a loss of ADL if the member REQUIRES assistance to perform at least two of the six activities of daily living. Initial medical review of the claim the physician indicated that he would allow for the applicant requiring assistance for dressing but not bathing. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPFC evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant’s...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01054

    Original file (BC 2014 01054.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Due to his traumatic injury, he is entitled to TSGLI and he has provided the supporting documents indicating his inability to perform at least two of the six ADLs. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPFC recommends denial indicating that after reviewing the applicant’s original claim and appeal, he does not meet TSGLI criterion for ADL loss due...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110015703

    Original file (20110015703.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    To be eligible for payment of TSGLI, service members must meet all of the following requirements: * must be insured by SGLI when you experience a traumatic event * must incur a scheduled loss and that loss must be a direct result of a traumatic injury * must have suffered the traumatic injury prior to midnight of the day that you separate from the uniformed services * must suffer a scheduled loss within 2 years (730 days) of the traumatic injury * must survive for a period of not less than...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00608

    Original file (BC 2014 00608.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    A complete copy of the AFPC/DPFC evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant’s counsel argues that evidence material to the claim was not considered, the relevant standards for providing ADLs loss were misapplied, and the applicant’s underlying traumatic injury was questioned although he received an initial payment of $25,000. The preponderance of the evidence in the applicant’s case proves he sustained at least 90 day ADL loss due to his traumatic...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100021572

    Original file (20100021572.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He claimed Other Traumatic Injury (OTI) ADL loss for 122 days due to the amputation of his right index finger and portions of his right hand, and his inability to: * bathe independently (needed physical and standby assistance). The applicant's request for correction of his records to show he is entitled to TSGLI for combat injuries including head and facial injuries, loss of right index finger, and hearing loss, was carefully considered. Neither the available records nor the medical...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02490

    Original file (BC-2011-02490.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02490 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Servicemembers Group Life Insurance Traumatic Injury Protection (TSGLI) claim, dated 13 Oct 09, be approved. As part of the appeal process, the claim and medical documentation was reviewed by a physician assigned to AFPC/DPSD who also agreed...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100015299

    Original file (20100015299.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was eligible for the $50,000.00 TSGLI benefit for the right arm amputation; however, he received the higher amount of $75,000.00 for the loss of ADL (bathing, dressing, and eating) and other traumatic injury (OTI) for 90 consecutive days of hospitalization. He claimed he suffered a qualifying loss for: * a second-degree burn to the body including the face and head * facial reconstruction of his lower jaw of 50 percent of the left mandibular on 15 October 2005; the form was certified by...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01789

    Original file (BC 2014 01789.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit B. In this case, there is no issue with the traumatic event element; however, the physicians that reviewed the original claim and appeal packages disagreed with the physician who certified ADL with regard to the patient meeting TSGLI criterion for ADL loss (bathe and dress) for any payable...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140003979

    Original file (20140003979.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Counsel requests reconsideration of the applicant's request for TSGLI by the Board on the basis that the preponderance of the evidence supports that he had 90 consecutive days of ADL loss which entitled him to an additional $50,000 TSGLI payment. Because he fractured his tibia and fibula, he required a spanning external fixator for a period of over 90 days in which he required assistance with ADLs from 19 June 2011 through 10 October 2011. The primary reason stated for the denial is "these...