RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01219
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
She receive a permanent disability retirement and/or a
100 percent disability rating rather than being discharged with
10 percent severance pay.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
She was left permanently incapacitated after her deployment to
Qatar. She has been rated 100 percent disabled by the Veterans
Affairs (VA) office and believes the 10 percent disability rating
by the Air Force was in error. She continues to struggle with
mental health issues.
In support of her request, the applicant provides a personal
statement, copies of her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or
Discharge from Active Duty, copies of her AF Form 348, Line of
Duty Determination, a copy of her VA Disability Rating, excerpts
of her medical records, a copy of her Notification of Eligibility
for Retire Pay at Age 60 letter, and a copy of her special order.
Her complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant served in the Air National Guard in the grade of
major (0-4). According to her DD Form 214 with a separation date
of 1 Feb 05, she served for over 20 years in an active and
inactive status. She was discharged with severance pay; however,
there are no records to show the member opted to decline a
Reserve retirement at age 60.
Additional relevant facts pertaining to this application are
contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of
the Air Force. Accordingly, there is no need to recite these
facts in this Record of Proceedings.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSDD recommends denial. DPSDD states that because the
applicant was a member of the Air National Guard (ANG) on an AGR
tour when she was discharged in 2005, the records of her
evaluation by the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) are not
available in the Automated Records Management System (ARMS). The
only records available for DPSDD to review are the dates shown in
the Military Personnel Data System (MilPDS) and the records
provided by the applicant.
The applicants case was properly processed through the
Disability Evaluation System (DES) in 2004 and the final
determination by the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council
(SAFPC) concurred with the previous two board findings and
recommended the applicant be discharged with severance pay with a
disability rating of 10 percent for bipolar disorder. Absent a
copy of the applicants AF Form 356, Findings and Recommended
Disposition of USAF Physical Evaluation Board, or pertinent
medical documentation from 2004, DPSDD cannot fully evaluate the
applicants claim.
The DPSDD complete evaluation is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant
on 9 Sep 11 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this
date, this office has received no response.
_________________________________________________________________
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 with regard to
the applicants request to receive a permanent disability
retirement and/or a 100 percent disability rating. We took
careful notice of the applicants 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 the rationale expressed as the basis for our decision
that the applicant has failed to sustain her burden of having
suffered either an error or injustice. Additionally, we note
that records are not available for the Air Force OPR to fully
evaluate the applicants claim. As such, we note that in the
absence of evidence to the contrary, there is a presumption that
governmrnt officials properly discharged their responsibilities.
Therefore, 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-2011-01219 in Executive Session on 16 Nov 11, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 Mar 11, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSDD, dated 29 Aug 11.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Sep 11.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2006-02940
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The AFBCMR Medical Consultant is of the opinion that a change in the applicant’s records is warranted to reflect a disability rating of 30 percent with a permanent disability retirement. The complete AFBCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 27 Jul 07, a copy of the Air Force...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03224
His records be corrected to reflect that his service- connected disability of Schizophrenia is combat related. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) which is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSDD recommends denial, indicating the preponderance of evidence reflects that no error or injustice occurred in...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02867
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSDD recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. The DVA awards service connection for claimed disability but does not make a determination as to whether conditions are combat...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03343
The severance pay he is receiving is not for a combat related injury. SAFPC noted: "The Board considered the member's contention/or permanent retirement at 30 percent disability rating and concurred with the disposition recommended by the previous boards to discharge the member with severance pay with a disability rating of 10 percent." At no time during the appeal process of his case did the applicant request the injury to his shoulder be rated as a combat related injury.
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 05881
The 2003 surgery and disc herniation was not in the line of duty, so she is predisposed for back pain/disc herniation from a pre-existing non-military back injury. On 28 Aug 07, an Informal LOD determination concluded the applicants major depressive disorder related to her back pain was in the line of duty. On 29 Aug 07, the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) awarded the applicant a 100 percent combined disability rating, based upon the loss of use of both lower extremities. The...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05881
The 2003 surgery and disc herniation was not in the line of duty, so she is predisposed for back pain/disc herniation from a pre-existing non-military back injury. On 28 Aug 07, an Informal LOD determination concluded the applicants major depressive disorder related to her back pain was in the line of duty. On 29 Aug 07, the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) awarded the applicant a 100 percent combined disability rating, based upon the loss of use of both lower extremities. The...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | bc-2011-04080
In view of the DVA rating decisions and the severity of her condition, the disability rating awarded by the Air Force should have been higher and she should have been retired by reason of physical disability. 60 percent – Requiring insulin, restricted diet, and regulation of activities with episodes of ketoacidosis or hypoglycemic reactions requiring one or two hospitalizations per year or twice a month visits to a diabetic care provider, plus complications that would not be compensable if...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04516
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSDD recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. The applicants contends that his episodic vertigo is combat related due to the time he spent deployed to Iraq during Jan through Jul 08; however, the applicant admits to not seeking immediate medical attention for his dizziness at the time he began experiencing it and there is no LOD determination as to the initial...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01249
On 11 February 2008, the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) evaluated the applicant’s case and recommended discharge with severance pay with a disability rating of 10 percent for post-concussive syndrome with headaches, sleep disturbance and cognitive and memory complaints with a history of four previous concussions under the Veterans Administration Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) codes 8045-9304. Under Title 10, U.S.C., Physical Evaluation Boards must determine if a...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04812
However, there was no documentation in the evidence of record to indicate the deceased former member was incompetent at the time of his passing. The applicant has provided no evidence her deceased husband was incompetent prior to his death. The service member must live until the date of separation to be considered retired. A complete copy of the AFPC/JA evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPFD recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice.