RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:		DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-01736
		INDEX CODE: 110.00
	XXXXXXX				COUNSEL:  NONE
			  		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

______________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be changed to reflect that he was medically retired rather than discharged with disability severance pay.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was injured in a motor vehicle accident while assigned in Panama.  He was not allowed to reenlist and believes he was discharged incorrectly.  He currently receives 80 percent disability compensation from the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) and he is being evaluated for neck and back injuries resulting from the accident.  

In support of his request, the applicant submits email communiqué, documentation associated with his DVA rating decision, his DD Form 214 Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty, a Disability Severance Pay Estimate, his Line of Duty Determination, and a copy of his separation orders. 

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered active duty on 29 March 1974.

A review of his medical records show that on 8 March 1993, he was involved in a motor vehicle accident and injured his neck. 

The pertinent history associated with his injuries can be found in the evaluation provided by the BCMR Medical Consultant at Exhibit C.

On 25 March 1997, he was honorably discharged with severance pay with a compensable rating of 20 percent, in the grade of staff sergeant (E-5). 

On 23 December 1997, the DVA awarded him a 10 percent disability rating for low back pain with limitation of motion, 10 percent disability for arthritis, and 10 percent for tinnitus.  He was denied service connection for a right shoulder condition.  He was awarded zero percent for musculoskeletal headaches.  On 9 February 2004, the DVA awarded him a combined compensable rating of 80 percent.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial.  The Medical Consultant states the applicant was discharged with severance pay with a disability rating of 20 percent.  The Military Disability Evaluation System (MDES) by law only compensates those medical conditions that were disabling at the time of discharge.  In this case, the applicant's condition was considered unfitting for the rigors of further military service but presented only a minor disruption in his ability to be gainfully employed in the civilian sector.  Once a disability rating is finalized, it cannot be changed despite any further progression of the applicant's disease.  On the other hand, the DVA is authorized to reevaluate an applicant's disability and assign a different rating as a condition changes over the years.  
The Medical Examiner notes the original DVA disability rating for the applicant's neck and low back pain, awarded nine months after his discharge, was the same rating he received from the MDES.  The applicant was also awarded a 10 percent rating for tinnitus by the DVA.  The applicant's tinnitus was not considered a disabling condition by the Air Force.  The preponderance of evidence of the record shows the applicant's neck and low back condition were appropriately assessed and evaluated.  Actions and dispositions in this case are proper and equitable reflecting compliance with Air Force directives that implement the law.

The complete Medical Consultant evaluation, with attachments, is at exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant states after serving on active duty in the Marines for four years, he joined the Army Reserves for about a year and the records for that period were lost.  He switched from the Army Reserves directly to the USAFR and had every intention of staying until retirement.  He was hurt in Panama which is documented.  At reenlistment time (1997-physical) he was literally sent home and had to write his congressman to get help from the Air Force.  He did not understand what was happening to him at the time of release (with severance pay).  He believes he would have wanted to be medically retired.  When he was 17, he joined the Marines and continued in the Reserves until being sent home.  The way he was released is incorrect; he is a proud American and was given a raw deal as a young staff sergeant.  He wants the military privileges he should have been given when he was released from service.  

The applicant's complete response is at Exhibit E.

________________________________________________________________

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.  After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded by his assertions, that he has been the victim of an error or injustice.  We agree with the opinion of the BCMR Medical Consultant and adopt his rationale as basis for our conclusion that the applicant's case was properly assessed and evaluated under the applicable directives.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis upon which to favorably consider 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2007-01736 in Executive Session on 27 November 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2007-01736 was considered:

 Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 29 May 2007, w/atchs.
 Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
 Exhibit C.  Letter, Medical Consultant, dated 5 October 2007 w/atch. 
 Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 October 2007.
 Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 22 October 2007.