RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03774 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He receive a permanent medical retirement with a 100 percent disability rating retroactive to his date of separation (22 June 2004) with the associated pay and allowances. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was permanently disabled as a result of injuries sustained in combat while serving on active duty in support of Operations IRAQI FREEDOM and ENDURING FREEDOM (OIF/OEF). He was not screened, examined or counseled at the time of his separation on his injuries or retirement options. He has met the proof of eligibility for a permanent disability retirement. Failure to grant his request would be a deprivation of earned benefits. In support of his request, the applicant provides a letter from the Social Security Administration, his Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) rating decision and a copy of his DOD identification card. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 26 February 2004, the applicant entered a period of active duty and was released on 22 June 2004 with a narrative reason for separation of “Completion of required active service.” According to a DVA rating decision dated 27 May 2014, the applicant received a 100 percent disability rating for Post- Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) with depressive disorder, tinnitus and left ear hearing loss effective 27 August 2009. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The AFBCMR Clinical Psychology Consultant recommends denial. The applicant has not supplied evidence with his release from military service that shows he was disabled at that snap shot in time and required Disability Evaluations System (DES) processing. In Accordance With (IAW) DODI 1332.38, Physical Disability Evaluation, in order for the applicant to have been entered into the DES, he must have met the criteria for such a referral. Specifically, he must have suffered from a medical condition that was eligible at that time for referral and received optimal medical treatment benefits or he must have been expected to be unable to return to full military duty within one year of the diagnosis of his medical condition. Thus, a diagnosis alone would not have triggered DES processing. The military departments operate under 10 U.S.C. and must base its actions on evidence available at the “snap shot” in time of final military disposition. The applicant did not supply medical records for this case which document an impairment of functioning during military service nor at the time of discharge that meets the definition of a disability found in DODI 1332.38. Alternatively, the DVA operates under a different set of laws, 38 U.S.C., with a different purpose, and is authorized to offer service connection and compensation for any medical condition for which it has established a nexus with military service regardless of the narrative reason for separation or the length of time transpired since discharge. The DVA may periodically reassess a veteran’s medical condition and adjust disability ratings based on the progression. Therefore, his current post- service DVA ratings do not equate to a retrospective conclusion he was not fit for duty at the time he left military service. A complete copy of the Clinical Psychology Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 9 July 2015 for review and comment 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 the applicant has failed to sustained his burden of proof that he has been the victim of an error of injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief. 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 issues involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. 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-2014-03774 in Executive Session on 3 September 2015 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 11 September 2014, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFBCMR Clinical Psychology Consultant, dated 1 July 2015. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 July 2015.