RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02972
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her disability discharge, with severance pay (DWSP) be changed
to a disability retirement.
________________________________________________________________
THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
She was miscounseled by the Physical Evaluation Board Liaison
Officer (PEBLO) about her available options at separation.
While her concern was to be able to receive TRICARE benefits for
the rest of her life, she was led to believe that this would be
provided based on her rating from the Department of Veterans
Affairs (DVA) and not the one from the Air Force.
On several occasions, she made it clear to the PEBLO that she
wanted a disability retirement in order to be eligible for
TRICARE benefits. She was again advised that she would need a
30 percent disability rating from DVA to be medically retired.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 10 Dec 10, a Medical Evaluation Board diagnosed the applicant
with back pain with radiculopathy and referred her to an
Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB).
On 22 Dec 10, an IPEB recommended her discharge with severance
pay, with a compensable disability rating of 20 percent, for
chronic low back pain with radiculopathy, with transitional
vertebrae, partial sacralization at the lowest level. On
19 Jan 11, she concurred with the findings of the IPEB.
On 23 Feb 11, the applicant was discharged with severance pay
with a compensable disability rating of 20 percent. She was
credited with one year, one month, and five days of active duty
service.
________________________________________________________________
THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPFD recommends denial, stating, in part, that based on a
preponderance of the evidence no error or injustice occurred
during the disability process.
Although the applicant contends that she was not briefed
correctly, that she would only receive TRICARE benefits if
awarded the minimum 30 percent disability rating from the Air
Force [sic], she provides no documents indicating the DVA
awarded her a higher disability for her back.
The complete DPFD evaluation is at Exhibit B.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
She was told over and over again by military as well as civilian
medical providers that her back condition would only get worse
and because of this, believed that appealing the IPEBs decision
was not only pointless, but would waste a lot of peoples time,
including her own. She was advised by the PEBLO that it would
be silly not to accept the IPEBs decision and risk losing any
and all of her Air Force disability ratings.
The applicants complete response is at (Exhibit D).
________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by
existing law or regulations.
2. The application was timely filed.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to
demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. After
thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and noting the
applicants contentions, we find no basis to warrant her
disability retirement. In this respect, we note that in order
for a member with less than 20 years of active military service
to be eligible for disability retirement, they must have a
combined disability rating of at least 30 percent. As such,
while the applicant contends that she was miscounseled regarding
the prerequisite for TRICARE eligibility, she has provided no
evidence to indicate that she should have received a disability
rating higher than the 20 percent she received. 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-2012-02972 in Executive Session on 7 Mar 13, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 22 Jun 12, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPFD, dated 18 Oct 12.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Oct 12.
Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 29 Nov 12.
Panel Chair
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.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05354
According to information provided by the applicant, on 16 Mar 06, the DVA evaluated the applicants diagnosis of dysthymia with anxious and granted him a 30 percent disability rating. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force, which are at Exhibits C and F. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPFD recommends denial indicating there was...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04620
Even if it is concluded the SGLI coverage is limited to the amount that was in effect on the date of his death, there is substantial evidence of an error or injustice as there was no counseling on SGLI by the Physical Evaluation Board Liaison Officer (PEBLO) during the pre- separation counseling process. In a letter dated 15 Jun 11, the Office of Service Members Group Life Insurance (OSGLI) advised the applicant that the coverage was based on the amount in effect at the time the decedent...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00766
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. Following this reasoning one could conclude that assigning the rating as determined by the DVA based on evidence during the members active service would be proper, since it was based upon clinical assessments conducted before her actual date of discharge. c. All requested medical documentation should be supplied to the Air...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | bc 2012 01218
In support of her request, the applicant provides a personal statement, copies of a letter from her civilian medical provider, extracts from her medical records, AF Form 356, and other various documents in support of her application. On 29 Apr 11, the IPEB reviewed the applicants case, found her unfit and recommended she be removed from the TDRL and discharged with severance pay with a compensable disability rating of 10 percent for chronic law back pain in accordance with the Veterans...
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-2013-00105
On 16 Jun 10, the Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB) reviewed the case file and medical records and also recommended discharge with severance pay with a disability rating of 10 percent for diagnosis of POTS using VASRD code 8299-8210. Her condition has not changed in severity, the DVA made their rating by correctly applying the laws for analogous ratings. In this respect, the applicant is requesting that her medical discharge be changed to a medical retirement based on the 80 percent...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01985
In support of her appeal, the applicant provides a 21-page brief from counsel, with attachments; copies of NGB Form 22, Report of Separation and Record of Service, issued in conjunction with her 21 Feb 11 transfer to the Retired Reserve; DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, issued in conjunction with her 23 Feb 11 release from active duty; Reserve Order EK-2605, retirement order, dated 16 Feb 11, and various other documents associated with her request. It...
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-2012-05273
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...