RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00259
	XXXXXXX	COUNSEL: NONE
		HEARING DESIRED: NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  Her disability discharge be changed to a medical 
retirement.

2.  Her AF Form 356, Findings and Recommended Disposition of 
USAF Physical Evaluation Board, be changed to include all 
service connected disabilities.

3.  Her disability rating be increased.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She should be medically retired and given a 50 percent 
disability rating.  After 11 years of dedicated service, she was 
found unfit for continued service.  The Physical Evaluation 
Board (PEB) overlooked multiple disabilities during the 
evaluation.  However, on 20 Jan 2006, the Department of Veterans 
Affairs (DVA) awarded her a 50 percent disability rating for 
service connected disabilities.  Although these service 
connected disabilities were fully documented in her military 
medical records, they were overlooked and not documented on the 
original PEB.  These service connected disabilities not only 
caused her to be unfit for duty but she continues to receive 
medical care.  She was unaware that the PEB decision could be 
corrected until she received a letter from the Physical 
Disability Board of Review.

In support of her request, the applicant provides copies of her 
AF Form 356, Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) Rating 
Decision; DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from 
Active Duty; VA Form 9, Appeal to Board of Veterans’ Appeals; 
Standard Forms 600, Chronological Record of Medical Care, and 
various other documents associated with her request.

Her complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________



STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 13 Nov 1992, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force.

On 10 Mar 2003, the Informal PEB (IPEB) reviewed the applicant’s 
chronic neck pain secondary to degenerative disk disease status 
post cervical fusion associated with Fibromyalgia and 
recommended discharge with severance pay with a disability 
rating of 20 percent.

On 24 Jun 2003, she was separated from active service for 
physical disability under the provisions of 10 USC § 1203, with 
severance pay.  She had 10 years, 7 months and 11 days of active 
service.

According to the 20 Jan 2006, DVA Rating decision provided by 
the applicant, she received an overall or combined rating of 
50 percent for Gastrointestinal Reflux Disease (GERD) (also 
claimed as hiatal hernia), Fibromyalgia with migraine headaches, 
Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS), depression with panic attacks, 
insomnia, polyuria due to neurogenic bladder, bilateral knee 
pain (claimed as bilateral patellofemoral syndrome), and 
thoracic dysfunction effective 24 Jun 2006.

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:

AFPC/DPFD recommends denial.  DPFD states that the preponderance 
of evidence reflects that no error or injustice occurred during 
the disability process or at the time of separation.  On 10 Mar 
2003, the IPEB reviewed the case for chronic neck pain secondary 
to degenerative disk disease status post cervical fusion 
associated with fibromyalgia.  The IPEB noted the diagnoses of 
GERD and Chiari I malformation as conditions that can be 
unfitting but were not currently compensable or ratable at the 
time of review by the IPEB.  The Board recommended discharge 
with severance pay with a disability rating of 20 percent.  On 
13 Mar 2003, the applicant non-concurred and requested a formal 
hearing with counsel.  On 6 May 2003 she requested to waive a 
formal hearing and accept the recommendation of the IPEB.  On 
13 May 2003, a discharge message was sent that established 
23 Jun 2003 as the date of separation.

The DVA disability evaluation system operates under separate 
laws.  Under Title 10, USC, PEBs must determine if a member's 
condition renders the individual unfit for continued military 
service relating to office, grade, rank or rating.  The fact 
that a person may have a medical condition does not mean that 
the condition is necessarily unfitting for continued military 
service.  To be unfitting, the condition must preclude the 
member from fulfilling their military duties.  If the board 
renders a finding of unfit, the law provides appropriate 
compensation due to the premature termination of their career.  
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.  It is the charge of the DVA to pick up where the Air 
Force must, by law, leave off.  Under Title 38, the DVA may rate 
any service connected condition based upon future employability 
or reevaluate based on changes in the severity of a condition.  
This often results in different ratings by the two agencies.

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 was forwarded 
to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days.  As of 
this date, no response has been received by this office (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; 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 an injustice.  We note 
that the applicant requests her AF Form 356 be corrected to 
include all of her service connected injuries, her disability 
rating percentage be increased and that she receive a medical 
retirement.  However, based on the preponderance of the 
evidence, it appears the applicant’s disability rating of 
20 percent was properly adjudicated and we found no evidence 
which would lead us to believe that her separation was in error 
or contrary to the governing Air Force instructions.  Therefore, 
we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force 
OPR and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that 
the applicant has failed to sustain her burden that she has 
suffered either an error or an injustice.  In the absence of 
persuasive 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 29 Oct 2013, under the provisions of AFI 
36-2603:

, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC-
2013-00259:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 11 Nov 2012, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPFD, dated 12 Feb 2013.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Feb 2013




								
								Panel Chair