Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01178
Original file (BC-2011-01178.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01178 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His discharge be changed to a disability retirement. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He should have been disability retired from the Air Force Reserve 
(AFR); however, he was discharged. He had 30 days to complete 
his 20 years. However, he was sick and unable to perform the 
30 days required. He did not realize that he could retire with 
19 years of satisfactory service completed. He believes that 
since he has been receiving Social Security Disability, he should 
have been given a disability retirement. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides personal 
letters, a copy of a letter from the Social Security 
Administration Retirement, Survivors and Disability Insurance 
office, copies of letters from the Department of Veterans Affairs 
(DVA), copies of printouts from the Air Reserve Personnel Center, 
and a copy of a letter from SAF/MBRB. 

 

His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant served in the Air National Guard in the grade of 
master sergeant. 

 

His ANG/USAFR Point Credit Summary reflects he had a good 
retirement/retention year from 21 May 73 to 19 Aug 94. However, 
from 21 May 77 to 19 Aug 79 his status was “civilian”. He was 
relieved from his assignment and honorably discharged effective 
1 Dec 98 after serving 19 years of satisfactory service. 

 

On 11 Jun 99, the DVA rated the applicant with the following 
disabilities with a correlating disability rating for: 

 

 a. 50 percent for major depression. 

 


 b. 10 percent for degenerative arthritis of the cervical spine. 

 

 c. 10 percent for hypertension on medication. 

 

 d. 10 percent for diabetes on medication. 

 

 e. 10 percent for PEDIS. 

 

The applicant’s non-service connected disabilities have a 
combined evaluation of 70 percent; effective date of benefits was 
3 Mar 97. 

 

On 25 Nov 11, the applicant temporarily closed his case. 

 

On 22 Mar 12, the applicant requested to reopen his BCMR request. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFRC/SG recommends denial. SG states the applicant did not 
provide any information to substantiate his request for a medical 
retirement. The DVA confirms his diagnosis; however, a service 
connection was not established. 

 

The complete AFRC/SG evaluation is at Exhibit B. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

The applicant sent in a copy of his mental health records from 
Kaiser Permanente to be added as evidence to his case. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial. The Medical 
Consultant states there are no line of duty documents presented 
to reflect the existence of a service incurred or aggravated 
illness or injury as a probable alternative cause for his release 
from the military. 

 

The DVA rating official acknowledged, in a rationale dated 19 Sep 
98, that the applicant was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder 
with Depressed Mood due to stress at work and difficulty dealing 
with co-workers; and that his symptoms of depression began in 
1991 due to stress on the job. The rationale further shows the 
“recent onset of [a] psychiatric disorder” and “no evidence which 
would relate this disorder at the time [the applicant] was on 


active duty.” The Social Security Administration and a pension 
by the DVA have awarded the applicant compensation. 

 

In order to justify a medical retirement, there must be a service 
incurred or aggravated condition that interferes with military 
service which is disqualifying under the governing regulation. 
The military Disability Evaluation System (DES) can by law only 
offer compensation for and when a service incurred or aggravated 
illness or injury specifically rendered a member unfit for 
continued active service and was the cause for career 
termination; and then only for the degree of impairment present 
at the time of separation and not based on future possibilities. 

 

The DVA is authorized to offer compensation for any medical 
condition determined service incurred or aggravated, without 
regard to its impact upon a service member’s fitness to serve or 
narrative reason for release from military service. Moreover, as 
in the case under review, the DVA is authorized to offer a 
pension for non-service incurred conditions when they 
significantly interfere with a veteran’s employability or under 
other qualifying criteria, e.g., not discharged for dishonorable 
reasons and a total rating as a result of a disability not caused 
by willful misconduct. 

 

There are provisions for length of service retirements for 
service members with greater than 15, but less than 20 years of 
satisfactory years of service, who have been found disqualified 
for a non-service incurred illness. However, the evidence in 
this case does not reflect the applicant’s diagnosed Adjustment 
Disorder would qualify for a length of service retirement. 
Therefore, the Medical Consultant opines the applicant has not 
met the burden of proof of an error or injustice that warrants a 
change in his record. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

The applicant responded by reopening his BCMR request. 

 

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit G. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 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 the BCMR 
Medical Consultant and adopt their rationale as the basis for our 
conclusion that 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 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-2011-01178 in Executive Session on 17 Apr 12, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 25 Mar 11, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFRC/SG, undated. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 23 Aug 11, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 31 Oct 11. 

 Exhibit F. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 3 Nov 11. 

 Exhibit G. Letter, Applicant, dated 22 Mar 12. 

 

 

 Panel Chair 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02147

    Original file (BC-2012-02147.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    ________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends approval, noting the applicant’s record should be amended to reflect, as a minimum, the applicant was placed on active duty orders for pay and points on 5 Mar 11 and remained so until his medical retirement effective 29 Aug 12. The applicant’s request is duly noted; however, we did not find the evidence provided substantial enough to override the opinions...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01954

    Original file (BC-2005-01954.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    The fact that the applicant has been granted service connected disability from the DVA does not entitle her to Air Force disability compensation. Applicant contends her psychiatric condition was aggravated by her Air Force Reserve service. We believe it is interesting to note that although the applicant was diagnosed with personality disorder while on active duty and reported symptoms of depressed mood at the time of her separation examination, she did not seek medical attention nor was...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-00162

    Original file (BC-2009-00162.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 BCMR Medical Consultant at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFRC/SG recommends denial of the applicant's request and states that he was deemed medically disqualified for world-wide active military service due to chronic pain in his shoulder. Air Force Regulation (AFR) 35-41,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 02357

    Original file (BC 2012 02357.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Based on the available records, the applicant served on active duty, from 13 Oct 82 to 29 Oct 92 and was transferred to the Air Force Reserve. They must have eight years of active service and have been on active duty orders for more than 30 days at the time the condition became unfitting, as subsequently determined by the PEB, and meet all other requirements set forth under the law and governing Air Force...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-00979

    Original file (BC-2012-00979.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-00979 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Line of Duty (LOD) Determination, dated 16 November 2011, for allergic rhinitis and chronic sinusitis be changed from “Existed Prior to Service - Not Applicable” (EPTS/NA) to “In the Line of Duty” (ILOD) or “Existed Prior to Service – Aggravated”...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 00516

    Original file (BC 2013 00516.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 1 Apr 10, the applicant voluntarily separated from active duty to transfer to the Air Force Reserve after 6 years, 5 months, and 24 days of active service. On 5 Apr 10, the applicant enlisted in the Air Force Reserve. A complete copy of the BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit E. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the AFBCMR Medical Consultant and Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 04086

    Original file (BC 2012 04086.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was placed on a “4” profile, which restricted him from reserve participation for pay or points until his fitness for continued military service was determined. Therefore, he was recommended for separation from the Air Force. While the applicant argues that his disqualifying conditions are at least partially related to his service, he has presented no evidence whatsoever that his conditions were incurred or aggravated by his military service.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01315

    Original file (BC-2011-01315.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Though the applicant notes Reserve duties aggravated his condition, there is no evidence in the Reserve orders or medical record that support his claim. The applicant points out that SG accurately states, “ according to documentation from the Department of Veterans Affairs that the associated disability originated from his service while on active duty and is service connected.” c. He submits documentation from his medical records to support his claim that his Reserve duties aggravated his...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2008-04519

    Original file (BC-2008-04519.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    SGP notes to be eligible for medical retirement, the applicant must have incurred or aggravated a disqualifying condition in the line of duty. A Line of Duty (LOD) determination was provided for the diagnosis of right acoustic neuroma; however, it was not processed beyond the medical reviewer and no final determination is provided. The complete A1K evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 11...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03317

    Original file (BC 2013 03317.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty; medical records, letters of support, and other various documents associated with his request. Thus none of these conditions are In the Line of Duty (ILOD) as applied to Air Force disability retirement. The complete BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...