RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-04759 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The type of separation he received be changed from “Discharged” to a medical retirement. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Prior to separating from the Air Force he was evaluated by the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) to determine his disability rating. The DVA rated his medical condition at 50 percent. The evaluation was conducted prior to his discharge; therefore, the 50 percent rating was valid at the time of his discharge. He did not receive the results of the disability evaluation until one year after his discharge so he was unaware his medical condition qualified for a disability rating. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 4 January 2001, the applicant entered the Regular Air Force. On 1 July 2012, the applicant received an honorable discharge, and was credited with 11 years, 5 months, and 28 days of active service. His narrative reason for separation is “Miscellaneous/General Reasons.” In a letter dated 29 August 2013, the DVA assigned the applicant a 50 percent disability rating for Generalized Anxiety Disorder, effective 2 July 2012. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. The military Disability Evaluation System, established to maintain a fit and vital fighting force, can by law, under Title 10, United States Code (USC), only offer compensation for those service incurred diseases or injuries which specifically rendered a member unfit for continued active service and were the cause for career termination; and then only for the degree of impairment present at the time of separation and not based on future progression of disease or injury. Although the applicant has been assigned disability compensation for Generalized Anxiety Disorder by the DVA, no evidence is presented to indicate that any medical condition precluded the applicant from reasonably performing the duties of his office, grade, rank, or rating. Specifically, there is no evidence the applicant had a medical condition so severe as to disqualify him from worldwide duty to the extent or duration that warranted a Medical Hold and referral for Medical Evaluation Board/Physical Evaluation Board (MEB/PEB) processing. This includes the fact that no AF Forms 469, Duty Limiting Condition Report, or AF Forms 422, Notification of Air Force Member’s Qualification Status, are presented to depict the existence of a medical condition affecting duty and/or mobility that warranted MEB/PEB processing. On the other hand, operating under a different set of laws (Title 38, USC), with a different purpose, the DVA is authorized to offer compensation for any medical condition determined service-incurred, without regard to [and independent of] its demonstrated or proven impact upon a service member’s retainability, fitness to serve, or the narrative reason for separation. With this in mind, Title 38, USC, which governs the DVA compensation system, was written to allow awarding compensation ratings for conditions that were not unfitting for military service at the time of separation. This is the reason why an individual can be found fit for release from military service for one reason and yet sometime thereafter receive a compensation rating from the DVA. A complete copy of the BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 20 August 2015, a copy of the BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation was forwarded to the applicant 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 timely filed. 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 BCMR Medical Consultant and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not 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. 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-2014-04759 in Executive Session on 29 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 14 November 2014, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 13 August 2015. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 August 2015.