RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-02215
		INDEX CODE:  108.02
		COUNSEL:  DAV

		HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His disability discharge with severance pay be changed to reflect he was permanently retired for disability reasons.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) inaccurately rated his medical condition as 20% disabling. He meets the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) guidelines for a rating of 60% and the PEB should have rated his condition at a minimum rating of 60%.

In support of his request, applicant provided a personal statement, a copy of his DD Form 214, documentation associated with his disability evaluation system processing, and documentation extracted from his medical records.  His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant contracted his initial enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 21 Jun 95.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of senior airman, having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 21 Jun 98.

An MEB was convened on 18 Feb 99 and referred his case to an Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) with a diagnosis of Type I Diabetes Mellitus controlled with diet, short and long acting insulin.  On 24 Feb 99, the IPEB found him unfit for further military service and recommended he be discharged with severance pay with a compensable rating of 20%.  The applicant initially did not agree with the findings and recommended disposition of the IPEB, but after consulting counsel elected to waive his right to a formal hearing.  On 15 Mar 99, the Air Force PEB directed the applicant be discharged with severance pay with a disability rating of 20%.  He was discharged on 27 Apr 99.  He served 3 years, 10 months, and 6 days on active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial.  The Medical Consultant states applicant was discharged with severance pay due to a new onset of Type I Diabetes Mellitus requiring insulin and a restricted diet consistent with a 20% rating.  The aspects of his disease he cites as reason for a higher rating occurred earlier in the course of treatment and not in the optimally treated state, which final disability ratings are adjudicated.  Frequent routine diabetes follow up with diabetes care specialists is not a direct reflection of disease severity, but a standard of care for routine management.  With current medical management, new onset of Type I Diabetes Mellitus in the optimally treated state does not result in significant occupational limitations outside the requirements to accommodate diet, medication and medical visits, and would rarely warrant more than a 20% rating.  Worsening of the disease due to noncompliance with therapy is not compensable under DoD rules.  The Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant’s counsel on 9 Jan 04 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

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 are not persuaded by the applicant's contentions that his disability processing and the rating he received at final disposition of his case were in error or unjust.  Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issue involved.  Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2003-02215 in Executive Session on 16 Mar 04, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 5 Jun 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records
    Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 17 Dec 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Jan 04.