RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03343
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His shoulder injury be considered combat related and paid as such.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was injured while on orders in Kyrgyzstan and was discharged
because of the injury. The severance pay he is receiving is not
for a combat related injury. It should be combat related because
he was injured in the line of duty (LOD) in a war zone.
United States Code (USC) Title 10, 1212, Disability Severance Pay,
states, the minimum years of service of a member for purposes of
subsection (a)(I) shall be as follows: (A) Six years in the case
of a member separated from the armed forces for a disability
incurred in line of duty in a combat zone (as designated by the
Secretary of Defense for purposes of this subsection) or incurred
during the performance of duty in combat-related operations as
designated by the Secretary of Defense.
In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of his AF
IMT 348, Line of Duty Determination (LOD), and USC, Title 10.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Based on the applicants submission and the available records, he
was released from the Air Force on 22 Aug 2012. The narrative
reason for separation was Release Due to Demobilization.
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are
contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the
Air Force at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPSDD recommends denial. DPSDD states the Informal
Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) reviewed the case on 4 Aug
2010 and determined the condition of right shoulder pain status
post arthroscopic surgery was unfitting for continued military
service, and recommended discharge with severance pay (DWSP) with
a disability rating of 10 percent, Veterans Administration
Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) Code 5304. On 5 Aug
2010, the applicant non-concurred and requested a formal hearing
with counsel. On 16 Nov 2010, the Formal Physical Evaluation
Board (FPEB) reviewed the case and recommended DWSP with a
disability rating of 10 percent, VASARD code 5304. On 17 Nov
2010, the applicant non-concurred and requested his case, with
rebuttal, be reviewed by the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel
Council (SAFPC). On 2 May 2011, SAFPC directed he be discharged
and receive severance pay with a disability rating of 10 percent.
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.
DPSDD states the applicant relates that the injury to his right
shoulder occurred while moving palletized water bottles to a
hanger and flared up again near the end of his deployment while
throwing a football and loading baggage to return home.
Department of Defense Instruction 1332.38 states, "The fact that a
member may have incurred a disability during a period of war or in
an area of armed conflict, or while participating in combat
operations is not sufficient to support this finding. There must
be a definite causal relationship between the armed conflict and
the resulting unfitting disability."
Injuries caused by moving cases of water in an area of armed
conflict, are not considered combat related as they do not differ
from circumstances occurring in civilian pursuits and are not
incident to a hazard or risk of military service. Based on
definition, the facts and circumstances involved, the IPEB
determined the applicant's medical conditions were not caused by
an instrumentality of war or a direct result of armed conflict.
The complete DPSDD evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 17 Apr 2012, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded
to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days. To
date, a response has not been received (Exhibit D).
_________________________________________________________________
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. 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 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 this application in
Executive Session on 31 May 2012, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC-
2011-03343:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 23 Aug 2011, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSDD, dated 26 Sep 2011, w/atchs.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Apr 2012.
Panel Chair
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-2012-02217
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02217 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES IN THE MATTER OF: ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His disability rating be changed from 0 to 30 percent and retired by reason of physical disability. The Board also noted the applicant had no rash whatsoever at that time. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-02217
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02217 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES IN THE MATTER OF: ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His disability rating be changed from 0 to 30 percent and retired by reason of physical disability. The Board also noted the applicant had no rash whatsoever at that time. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120016319
The applicant requests correction of his DA Form 199 (Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) Proceedings) to show: * his back injury was combat-related * he received a 30 percent permanent disability rating 2. The applicant states: * his back injury originally occurred during a training exercise in conditions simulating war in 1997 and it is documented in his Line of Duty (LOD) paperwork * his 2004 injury occurred while loading a tactical truck with equipment (all instrumentalities of war) in the...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00953
The fact that a person has a medical condition does not mean that the condition is unfitting for continued military service. Based on definition, the facts and circumstances involved, the IPEB determined that the applicants medical conditions were not caused by an instrumentality of war or a direct result of armed conflict, but his prior back pain from 2009 was aggravated in the combat zone, but not combat related. His disabilities are classified as combat related, the unfitting...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130004657
The applicant requests, in effect, correction of his record to show: * all updates directed as a result of an approved recommendation of the Physical Disability Board of Review (PDBR) * all awards he is authorized * the appropriate entries on his DA Form 199 (Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) Proceedings) to indicate he was retired due to a combat-related disability incurred in the line of duty (LOD) 2. As a matter of equity, it would be appropriate to amend the DA Form 199 to reflect the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140018082
The applicant requests correction of his retirement orders to show his disability did (instead of did not) result from a combat-related injury. The applicant states: * His Line of Duty (LOD) established that his injuries occurred during deployment to Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) from 2005 to 2006 * They occurred in a combat situation and should be considered combat-related and in direct result of armed conflict/war * His retirement orders state that his injuries were not combat-related; he...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150000205
A DA Form 199-1 shows, on 5 June 2014, a formal PEB conducted at Joint Base Leis-McChord, WA, found the applicant physically unfit and recommended a rating of 40 percent (%) with permanent disability retirement. The applicant contends that his records should be corrected to show he was permanently retired due to a combat-related physical disability condition (i.e., back injury) that was a direct result of armed conflict during a period of war and is a combat injury as defined by law. g....
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...