RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-03140
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her disability discharge be changed to a medical retirement.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
She believes she is entitled to a medical retirement based on the
Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) rating her medical condition at
40 percent.
In support of her request, the applicant provided a copy of her DD
Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty AF Form
356, Findings and Recommended Disposition of USAF Physical Evaluation
Board, and a DVA Rating Decision.
Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 26 Jun 77, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force.
On 23 Mar 09, the applicant underwent a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB)
that diagnosed her condition as chronic left ankle and leg pain and
recommended that she be referred to an Informal Physical Evaluation
Board (IPEB).
On 22 Jun 09, the IPEB found the applicant unfit and recommended her
separation with severance pay with a 10 percent disability rating. On
22 Jul 09, the applicant concurred with the findings and
recommendations of the IPEB.
On 27 Aug 09, the applicant was discharged with severance pay with a
10 percent disability rating. She served two years, two months and
two days of active service.
The Department of Defense (DoD) and the DVA disability evaluation
systems operate under separate laws. Under Title 10, U.S.C, a PEB
must determine if a condition renders a member unfit for continued
military service. The fact that a person may have a medical condition
does not mean that the condition is unfitting for continued military
service. To be unfitting, the condition must be such that it alone
precludes the individual 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 the service disability boards must rate
disabilities based on the individual's condition at the time of
evaluation. It is the charge of the DVA to pick up where the AF must,
by law, leave off. Under Title 38, the DVA may rate any service-
connected condition based upon future employability or reevaluate
based on changes in the severity of a condition. This often results
in different ratings by the DoD and DVA.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPD recommends the requested relief be denied. DPPD states the
preponderance of evidence reflects that no error or injustice occurred
during the disability process.
The complete AFPC/DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit C.
The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial. The Medical
Consultant states the Military Disability Evaluation System (MDES)
was established to maintain a fit and vital force and removes those
individuals who can no longer perform the duties of their office,
grade, rank or rating by reason of an illness or injury. Although,
the military departments and the DVA are required to use the same
VASRD in making rating decisions, there is no statutory requirement
that the rating determinations for match. The fact the DVA rating is
higher is not a basis for the Air Force to assign the same rating and
is not sufficient proof of an error or injustice.
The complete AFBCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on
5 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.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of error or injustice. After thoroughly reviewing the
evidence of record, the Board is not persuaded that relief should be
granted. The applicant's contentions are duly noted; however, the
Board does not find these assertions, in and by themselves,
sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air
Force office of primary responsibility of and the BCMR Medical
Consultant. The applicant was separated for an unfitting condition
that interfered with her ability to continue to serve on active duty
and was rated based on the seriousness of her condition at the time of
separation. It appears the applicant believes that since she is
currently receiving a 40 percent disability rating from the DVA, this
in some way validates that she should have received a higher rating
from the Air Force. However, this is not the case. In this respect,
we note the Air Force and the DVA are separate federal agencies and
operate under different laws and policies. The Air Force is tasked to
maintain a fit and vital force and assesses a service member's
disability with respect to fitness for duty and if found unfit,
compensates the member based on the degree of impairment that cut-
short their military career. The DVA, however, rates for any and all
service-connected conditions, to the degree they interfere with future
employability, without consideration of fitness. When combined these
two systems provide a continuum of coverage of our veterans.
Therefore, in view of the foregoing, the Board finds no compelling
basis upon which to recommend the requested relief.
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 issue(s) 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-
2010-03140 in Executive Session on 14 Jul 11, under the provisions of
AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 4 Aug 10, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Military Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPD, dated 15 Nov 10.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, dated
5 Apr 11, w/atch.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 Apr 11.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01519
Title 38 USC governs the DVA compensation system in awarding disability percentage ratings for conditions that are not unfitting for military service. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPD states the purpose of the disability evaluation system (DES) is to maintain a fit and vital force by separating or retiring members who are unable to perform the duties of their office, grade, rank or rating. Evidence of record indicates the applicant was...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03940
He was found unfit for duty by the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) on 20 Oct 09. In accordance with AFI 36-3212, Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, and Separation, paragraph 3.17, the Board applied the Presumption of Fitness, and has determined your medical condition does not overcome the presumption, and recommends you be returned to duty. On 26 Oct 09, the applicant signed that he concurred with these findings. Disability boards must rate disabilities based on the...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03113
Further, it must be noted that the service disability boards must rate disabilities based on the individual's condition at the time of evaluation. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPD recommends the requested relief be denied. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial noting that while there may have been sufficient evidence...
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant reviewed this application and indicated that the applicant developed a bipolar disorder during the course of her active duty service, a condition which had not 2 AFBCMR 97- 01142 J been diagnosed prior to her service (as suggested by the IPEB) nor which was aggravated by "willful noncompliance" as the FPEB found. The Medical Consultant is of the opinion that the applicant should receive relief from the disability evaluation system and have...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-01580
He was not fully counseled on the Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) and PEB processes. In a letter dated 12 Oct 06, his commander recommended he be separated from service based upon the applicant’s communication difficulties. While the DVA may separately rate any and all medical conditions the applicant has, the military can only evaluate and rate those conditions which render a service member unfit to perform duty at the time of the determination.
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02827
The fact that a person may have a medical condition does not mean that the condition is unfitting for continued military service. In the medical Consultant’s view, the preponderance of evidence of the record shows that the applicant’s scoliosis condition existed prior to service, and that her back pain was the natural progression of the condition. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and recommendations...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02292
The FPEB reviewed his case and recommended permanent retirement with a 30 percent disability rating. Further, it must be noted that the service disability boards must rate disabilities based on the individual's condition at the time of evaluation. AFPC/DPPD'S complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states the evaluation stated he wanted his disability rating changed from...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-02597
The Air Force Informal Physical Evaluations Board’s (IPEB) determination that she be discharged from active service in the Air National Guard with a 20 percent disability was in error because the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA), “[u]sing the same medical records and statements less than six months later,” rated her disability at 50 percent. The IPEB reviewed the request and determined that these two conditions, in and of themselves, are not unfitting conditions and therefore would not...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00388
Medical documentation appeared to reflect she was reasonably capable of performing her assigned duties right up until the time of her release from active duty. Air Force disability boards can only rate unfitting medical conditions based upon the individual’s medical status at the time of their evaluation; in essence a snapshot of the condition at that time. In their view, the applicant has not submitted any material or documentation to show an injustice occurred at the time of...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01560
The BCMR Medical Consultant is of the opinion that the preponderance of the evidence does not support a finding of EPTS and recommends a change of records to show a disability discharge for Bulimia Nervosa at 10 percent. The decision to process a member through the military DES is determined by a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) when he or she is determined disqualified for continued military service. Based on the assessment by the BCMR Medical Consultant, it appears probable that the...