Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04695
Original file (BC-2011-04695.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

 AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04695 

 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His records be corrected to show he was permanently retired for 
physical disability with a compensable disability rating of 
30 percent rather than being discharged with severance pay (DWSP). 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

The decision to remove him from the Temporary Disability Retired 
list (TDRL) and discharge him with severance pay was unjust. As a 
member of the TDRL, he was supposed to have been re-examined every 
18 months but he never was. He was never informed that he had to 
report for a re-examination of his seizure disorder and has never 
been re-examined. Both the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) 
and Social Security Administration (SSA) have rated his condition 
at 80 percent and he is considered totally disabled. His 
condition has not improved. 

 

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of a white 
paper from the Air Force Disability System web page describing the 
relationship between the disability system and the AFBCMR, a page 
from the schedule of ratings – neurological conditions which shows 
the different ratings for seizures and associated ratings, an 
information sheet on the TDRL, a diary of his seizure activity, 
several pertinent pages of information from his service medical 
record (SMR), and a copy of his 3 Mar 08 retiree account 
statement. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 30 May 07, the applicant’s case was reviewed by the Informal 
Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) which recommended his name be 
placed on the TDRL with a disability rating of 40 percent. The 
applicant concurred and was officially placed on the TDRL on 14 
Aug 07. 

 


On 23 Jan 09, the applicant was notified of his periodic physical 
evaluation, scheduled to take place on 27 Feb 09. The applicant 
submitted progress notes from his civilian neurology outpatient 
clinic appointments called “Can-do” in lieu of having to attend 
his appointment. The IPEB accepted his “Can-do” progress notes 
and, on 28 May 09, reviewed the medical information therein and 
recommended he be removed from the TDRL and DWSP with a 10 percent 
disability rating. 

 

On 3 Jun 09, the IPEB’s findings, which included a statement that 
his condition had improved and noted that his last seizure had 
occurred in Nov 08, were mailed to the applicant with instructions 
to make his election, sign and date the paperwork, and return 
prior to 28 Jun 09. The applicant was notified that a non-
response would indicate his agreement with the findings and 
recommendations of the IPEB and that his name would be removed 
from the TDRL. Nothing was received from the applicant and his 
name was removed from the TDRL and he was duly discharged with 
entitlement to severance pay, effective 7 Sep 09. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSD recommends denial as a preponderance of evidence 
reflects that no error or injustice occurred during the disability 
process. 

 

While the applicant contends he was not afforded an opportunity to 
undergo a TDRL re-evaluation examination for the medical condition 
for which he was retired, his records indicate that travel orders 
were issued on 23 Jan 09 notifying him of his periodic physical 
evaluation to be held on 27 Feb 09. These orders were mailed to 
the applicant. The applicant submitted “Can-do” paperwork dated 
27 Jan 09 from his neurology outpatient clinic which the IPEB 
reviewed. The recommendation for discharge with severance pay 
with fact sheets was mailed to the applicant at the same address; 
however, no response was received, nor was the package returned as 
being undeliverable. 

 

DPSD’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant 
on 24 Jan 12 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 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 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 the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the 
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2011-04695 in Executive Session on 24 May 12, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 Nov 11, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSD, dated 21 Dec 11. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Jan 12. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair 

 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02246

    Original file (BC 2014 02246.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 16 Jan 98, he was scheduled for his first TDRL re-evaluation and the IPEB reviewed the medical information on 2 Feb 98 and recommended the applicant be removed from TDRL and DWSP with a 10 percent disability rating. Further, it must be noted the Air Force disability boards must rate disabilities based on the member’s condition at the time of evaluation; in essence a “snapshot” of their condition at that time. A complete copy of the Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-03494

    Original file (BC-2010-03494.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The DPSD complete evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 8 Apr 11 for review and comment within 30 days. 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00428

    Original file (BC-2010-00428.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant's records reflect in April 2002, he self-referred to Life Skills due to an anxiety while flying. The complete AFPC/DPSD evaluation is at Exhibit C. The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial of the applicant’s request for a hearing by the FPEB and change in his disability rating. The complete BCMR Medical Consultant's evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04590

    Original file (BC-2010-04590.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04590 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The 20 percent disability rating he received for his diabetes be increased to 40 percent and he be medically retired with a 40 percent disability rating. The USAF disability boards must rate disabilities based on the service member’s condition at the time...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01873

    Original file (BC-2012-01873.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) report, on 3 Nov 09, the applicant was diagnosed with neurocardiogenic syncope and his case was referred to Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB). On 29 Jun 10, the FPEB agreed with the unfit findings of the IPEB, but found his conditions service aggravated and recommended DWSP, with a combined compensable disability rating of 20 percent, with a 10 percent disability rating assigned to each condition. He understands the disability boards must...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00066

    Original file (BC-2010-00066.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    While the applicant's request for 60% rating is not recommended, the 40% rating is medically appropriate. The complete BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 3 September 2010 for review and comment within 30 days. We note the comments from the Air Force office of primary...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02228

    Original file (BC-2012-02228.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The IPEB noted that she had declined further “ablation surgery.” On 9 March 2006, the applicant concurred with the findings and recommended disposition of the IPEB. The complete AFBCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit G. _________________________________________________________________ 5 APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF THE ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 15 Feb 13, by letter, the applicant amended her request and now ask to be medically retired instead of being returned to duty. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01117

    Original file (BC-2012-01117.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01117 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO IN THE MATTER OF: _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His removal from the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) and discharge with entitlement to disability severance pay, effective 8 September 2010, be changed to a permanent retirement with a minimum 40 percent disability rating. The DPSD complete...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-03405

    Original file (BC-2010-03405.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-03405 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her diagnosis of “Adrenal Insufficiency” be added to her AF Form 356, Findings and Recommended Disposition of USAF Physical Evaluation Board, dated 22 Jul 10,” and included as part of her overall disability rating. It should also be noted that had...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-03058

    Original file (BC-2010-03058.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    According to a Duty Limiting Condition Report, dated 25 June 2008, she was placed in a “Not Present for Duty Status” in accordance with Air Force Instruction 48-123, paragraph (A)(2) and Air Force Reserve Command Surgeon General Policy Memorandum 06-01, due to a non- duty related medical condition that required a Worldwide Duty Evaluation (WDE) and evaluation by an MEB or PEB. Further, it must be noted the USAF disability boards must rate disabilities based on the member’s condition at that...