RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03349
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
_
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Angioneurotic Edema be given a rating of 40 percent and he
be given a medical retirement.
________________________________________________________________
_
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was separated for disability and was not given options or
educated for either a physical evaluation board or medical
evaluation board. He was not offered advice or counseling prior
to agreeing to and signing his discharge documentation.
In support of the applicants appeal, he provides a copy of his
DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active
Duty.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
_
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant entered active duty on 10 March 1989.
On 16 September 1996, a MEB convened and referred the
applicant's case to an Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB)
based on a diagnosis of angioneurotic edema with facial
swelling. On 22 November 1996, the IPEB found him unfit for
further military service and recommended discharge with
severance pay with a disability rating of 20 percent for
angioneurotic edema with facial swelling and shortness of
breath.
On 6 December 1996, the applicant agreed with the findings and
recommended disposition of the IPEB.
On 18 February 1997, the applicant was honorably discharged
under the provisions of AFI 36-3212 Disability, Severance Pay.
He served 7 years, 11 months and 9 days on active duty.
________________________________________________________________
_
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPFD recommends denial. DPFD states the applicant did not
exercise his two appeal rights to have his case heard before the
Formal Physical Evaluation Board and if necessary a review by
the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council.
The preponderance of evidence reflects that no error or
injustice occurred during the disability process.
The DPFD complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________
_
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 19 May 2013, a copy of the evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant for review and response within 30 days (Exhibit D).
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 an 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 failed to sustain his burden of proof of the
existence 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 an 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-2012-03349 in Executive Session on 7 January 2014,
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 27 April 2012 and
16 April 2013, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Applicants Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPFD, dated 6 May 2013.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 May 2013.
2
3
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00522
In a letter dated 8 January 2013, the applicant stated that he received an explanation of the IPEB findings from his assigned Air Force attorney and agreed with the findings of the IPEB and waived his right to a FPEB hearing. According to the DVA Rating Decision dated 16 January 2014, the evaluation of DVT, which was 10 percent disabling, was increased to 40 percent effective 29 October 2013. At the time of the IPEB findings, the DVA rated the applicants DVT at 0 percent.
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-05149
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-05149 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His military personnel records be corrected to reflect that he was permanently retired for physical disability, with a combined compensable disability percentage of 100 percent, instead of being discharged for physical disability with a combined...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | bc-2013-01038
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01038 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His separation orders be rescinded to allow his return to active duty. _______________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 15 Aug 2012, the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) reviewed the medical board...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00909
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00909 COUNSEL: JERICHO DUTCHOVER, DAV HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His diagnosis of Obstructive Sleep Apnea be added to his AF Form 356, Findings and Recommended Disposition of USAF Physical Evaluation Board, dated 14 Jan 08, and included as part of his overall disability rating. His medical...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01182
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01182 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reentry code (RE) 2Q (medically retired or discharged) be changed to allow him to reenlist. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His RE code precludes him from future consideration...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00259
The Board recommended discharge with severance pay with a disability rating of 20 percent. 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. The complete DPFD evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 17 Feb 2013, a copy of the Air Force evaluation...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 00648
Further, it is noted the Air Force disability boards must rate disabilities based on the members condition at the time of evaluation; in essence a snapshot of their condition at that time. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-05273
SAFPC noted The members low back condition is unfitting for continued military service. The DPFD complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 25 January 2013, a copy of the evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days (Exhibit D). ________________________________________________________________ _ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 00711
After being discharged, he received a service-connected disability rating of 30 percent for Bipolar Disorder from the Department of Veteran Affairs (DVA). Under Title 10, United States Code (USC), Physical Evaluation Boards must determine if a members condition renders them unfit for continued military service relating to their office, grade, rank or rating. The complete DPFD evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT'S REVIEW...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03593
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility, which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPFD recommends denial indicating there was no evidence of an error or injustice that occurred during the disability process. The applicant does not have the required 20 years of active service time to apply for CRDP. ...