RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2009-04581

                       COUNSEL:  NONE

                       HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her length of  service  (LOS)  retirement  be  changed  to  a  medical
retirement.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She suffered the loss of her left hand and three fingers on her  right
hand due to a letter bomb sent by a disgruntled servicemember.

In retrospect, if she had fully understood the difference between  LOS
retirement  versus  medical   retirement,   she   would   have   chose
differently.

She asks the Board to please  understand  that  the  unbearable  pain,
sorrow, emotional stress and uncertainties  have  taken  a  tremendous
toll on her.

She felt the medical retirement came with a stigma-a  sense  of  shame
and failure.

She has undergone 28 major surgeries over  the  past  8  years  in  an
effort to put her life back together.

In support of her request,  the  applicant  provides  copies  of  news
articles a DD Form 214,  Certificate  of  Release  or  Discharge  from
Active Duty, and copies  of  documents  extracted  from  her  military
personnel records.

Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 12 Jul 77, the applicant contracted her initial enlistment  in  the
Regular Air Force.

On 2 May 02, the applicant underwent a Medical Evaluation Board  (MEB)
for traumatic injuries involving her eyes, ears, abdomen, hands  which
she sustained from the explosion of a letter bomb.  The applicant  was
referred to an Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB).  On  20  May
02, the IPEB reviewed  the  case  and  found  the  applicant  fit  and
returned her to duty.  The IPEB  noted  the  applicant  felt  strongly
about being returned to duty and  finishing  her  career  on  her  own
terms.  The applicant also had strong command support for  her  return
to duty.

On  23  Sep  02,  the  applicant  applied  for  a  voluntary   service
retirement.  She retired on 1 Jul 03.  She served 25 years,  11 months
and 19 days on active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

APFC/DPSD recommends denial of the applicant’s request to overturn the
return to duty recommendation; however, they do recommend changing the
LOS  retirement  to  a  permanent  disability  retirement   with   the
appropriate VASRD code and percentage.  If, at any time prior  to  the
applicant’s  separation  date,  the  applicant’s  treating   physician
determined that hermedical status had deteriorated to show she was not
performing duties commensurate with her experience,  grade,  rank,  or
rating, then she could have been medically boarded for her conditions.
 The applicant underwent a physical disability evaluation prior to her
application for voluntary retirement and was found  fit  for  duty  in
accordance with the recommendations of her physicians, commander,  and
the applicant herself.  However, without the strong support, it  would
not have been unusual for the PEB to medically retire  a  member  with
her degree of injury.

AFPC/DPSD's complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

The  AFBCMR  Medical  Consultant  recommends  denial.    The   Medical
Consultant states, to justify a retroactive medical retirement,  there
must be evidence showing the applicant’s medical conditions  prevented
her from reasonably performing the duties of her office,  grade,  rank
and rating at the  time  of  LOS  retirement.   There  is  no  medical
documentation  provided  to  show  the  applicant’s  upper   extremity
injuries, or prostheses interfered with her  ability  to  perform  her
military  service,  or  that   she   experienced   a   duty   limiting
disqualifying impairment of vision or hearing; or suffered from a duty
limiting mental disorder.  Furthermore, there were  no  duty  limiting
profiles that prohibited worldwide qualification.

The Medical  Consultant  further  states  that  while  it  may  appear
disingenuous to deprive the applicant  of  a  medical  retirement  for
injuries far greater than many who have  received  this  benefit,  the
fact remains she demonstrated the  capacity  to  perform  her  duties,
which was the reason she was returned to duty.  If the
applicant had undergone another MEB within 12 months of her retirement
date, she would have been presumed fit.

The BCMR Medical Consultant’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on
29 Apr 11, for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, no
response has been received by this office.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.    The applicant has exhausted all remedies  provided  by  existing
law or regulations.

2.    The application was not timely filed;  however,  it  is  in  the
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

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 and the complete evidence of record in
judging the  merits  of  the  case.   While  we  note  that  AFPC/DPSD
recommends changing the applicant’s length of service retirement to  a
permanent disability retirement, as pointed out in the AFBCMR  Medical
Consultant’s evaluation, there is no medical evidence that  shows  the
applicant’s medical conditions interfered with her ability to  perform
her duties.  Also, if she had undergone another MEB within  12  months
of her retirement, she would have been presumed fit.  Consequently, we
are in  agreement with the  opinion  and  the  recommendation  of  the
AFBCMR Medical Consultant and adopt his rationale as the basis for our
conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an  error  or
injustice in this matter.  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  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-
2009-04581 in Executive Session on 14  June  2011  and  18 June  2011,
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      , Panel Chair
      , Member
      , Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 8 Dec 09, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSD, dated 18 Aug.
      Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, dated
                       25 Apr 11.
      Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Apr 11.





                             Panel Chair