ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: BC-2011-04310
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
________________________________________________________________
_
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her Reserve retirement be changed to a disability retirement.
________________________________________________________________
_
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is a former member of the Air National Guard who,
on 9 May 2007, presented to a military outpatient clinic with a
report of multiple episodes of bronchospasm. Her medical
records indicate she reported her symptoms were irritated by
her deployment to Turkey in 2003 and Iraq in 2004. The record
also indicates her condition was controlled with an inhaled
bronchodilator and inhaled steroid combination; however her
condition was determined disqualifying for retention under the
provisions of Air Force Instruction (AFI) 48-123. An Air Force
Form 348, Line of Duty Determination, dated 9 May 2007,
indicates the applicant had an initial LOD approved on 28 July
2004, regarding a diagnosis of acute bronchitis. A
pulmonologist subsequently diagnosed the applicant with Asthma,
which is a disqualifying condition for further military service.
Her respiratory condition was found to be In the Line of Duty
(ILOD).
On 20 September 2007, the applicant underwent a Medical
Evaluation Board (MEB) for Asthma and Sleep Apnea. Her case was
subsequently referred to the Informal Physical Evaluation Board
(IPEB). The IPEB found the applicants condition did not
prevent her from reasonably performing her duties of her office,
grade, rank or rating; and, recommended her for return to duty.
The applicant disagreed with the IPEB decision; however there is
no evidence to show she sought further appellate review of the
IPEB findings and recommended disposition.
As a result, even though the applicant was returned to duty, she
did not meet medical standards for worldwide deployments.
Because her position was a deployable one, her unit was
instructed to place the applicant in an Assignment Limitation
Code-C status with a re-evaluation period/expiration date of
31 December 2008, and to convert her position to a non-
deployable one in order to retain her. However, the applicants
position was projected for elimination at the end of Calendar
Year 2008; therefore, upon expiration of the converted non-
deployable position, she again became disqualified for
retention.
Because the applicant had served more than 15 but less than 20
years of satisfactory service, she was subsequently reassigned
to the Retired Reserve Section and placed on the USAF Reserve
Retired List effective 1 January 2009.
On 27 November 2012, the Board considered and denied the
applicants initial appeal to change her Reserve retirement to a
disability retirement. For an accounting of the facts and
circumstances surrounding the applicants earlier appeal; and,
the rationale of the decision by the Board, see the Record of
Proceedings (ROP) at Exhibit D with Exhibits A through C.
On 14 March 2013, the applicant submitted a request for
reconsideration, and provided civilian medical treatment
documentation as new evidence of her condition of Asthma.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit E.
________________________________________________________________
_
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. In earlier findings, the Board determined that there was insufficient
evidence to warrant changing the applicants Reserve retirement to a
disability retirement. After thoroughly reviewing the additional
documentation submitted in support of this appeal and the
evidence of record, we do not believe the applicant has overcome
the rationale expressed in the previous decision. Therefore, we
do not find the additional evidence presented is sufficient to
warrant the relief sought on that basis. In the absence of
evidence to the contrary, we find no basis upon which to
recommend favorable consideration of the applicants request.
2. 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-2011-04310 in Executive Session on 1 April 2014, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in connection
with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-04310:
Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 14 Mar 13, w/atchs.
Exhibit D. ROP, dated 8 Jan 13, w/Exhibits A through C.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04310
The applicant was retained for an additional period of time in the service after being found fit, until her position was eliminated. Nevertheless, decisions by the military departments are based upon evidence present at the time of release from service and are not binding by the DVA. A complete copy of the BCMR Medical Consultants evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE BCMR MEDICAL CONSULTANTS EVALUATION: A...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01109
We note the BCMR Medical Consultant states that had the applicant indeed completed a MEB in 2004 and was found unfit by a PEB, his case would have been referred to SAFPC for a final disposition. In this respect, we note that the applicant in PD2009-00221 was initially referred to the PEB for asthma, mild persistent and found unfit for continued military service and separated with a 10 percent disability rating, whereas in the case before us, there is no evidence the he was unable to perform...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2004-03839
On 6 May 2004, the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) performed a fitness determination only, concluding the applicant was unfit for continued military duty due to asthma. The BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPD recommends denial of the applicant’s request. The DPPD evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01757
The IPEB reviewed his case and found the member fit and recommended, "Return to Duty." BCMR Medical Consultant's complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluations and stated he sought a second opinion by pulmonologist in December 2005 and was diagnosed with asthma after having below normal pulmonary function tests. In this respect, the Board notes...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2006-01757
The IPEB reviewed his case and found the member fit and recommended, "Return to Duty." BCMR Medical Consultant's complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluations and stated he sought a second opinion by pulmonologist in December 2005 and was diagnosed with asthma after having below normal pulmonary function tests. In this respect, the Board notes...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01947
________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: AFPC/DPPD recommends the application be denied, and states, in part the applicant was processed through the Disability Evaluation System (DES) and was found unfit for continued military service based on asthma which existed prior to service. The applicant contends the determination that her asthma existed prior to her service was solely based on the single sentence in the MEB that she reported using an...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02611-2
For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings (ROP) at Exhibit F. On 30 November 2012, the applicants counsel submitted a request for reconsideration based on their submission of affidavits from the applicants former husband (member) and his current spouse agreeing to the requested relief and voluntarily relinquishing all rights and/or benefits under the members pre- and post-retirement...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05374
The applicant did not provide any evidence that an error or injustice occurred in the processing of her discharge. 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 the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of proof of the existence of an error or injustice. We note the comments of the...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-00797
In the clinical history taken in conjunction with her MEB, the applicant reported experiencing shortness of breath as a child, which was relieved by taking inhalers one time, although not formally diagnosed with asthma. The complete BCMR Medical Consultants 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 11 Sep 09 for review and...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04745
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04745 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Air Force (AF) Form 356, Findings and Recommended Disposition of USAF Physical Evaluation Board, be changed to reflect yes in Section 10, Item C, Disability was the direct result of Armed Conflict or was caused by an Instrumentality of War and...