RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-00217 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her medical separation be corrected to a medical retirement, and her pertinent records of the Department of the Air Force corrected to reflect such. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The Air Force (AF) Integrated Disability Evaluation System (IDES) phase was completed in Sep 10 but she was not processed accordingly or fairly in her separation process. Had she been evaluated by the Department of Veteran’s Affairs (DVA) prior to separation as other members who were medically separated at the same time as her, she would have been given the opportunity to medically retire. Instead, she was given 10 percent for inappropriate sinus tachycardia with palpitations by the AF with no consideration of her other medical conditions. After separation from the AF she was granted 80 percent disability by the DVA. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 20 Jan 04. On 10 Nov 10, the applicant was diagnosed with “Inappropriate Sinus Tachycardia.” On 6 Apr 11, 36MDOS/SGOKF recommended a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) based on her “Inappropriate Sinus Tachycardia.” On 3 May 11, the applicant’s commander sent a memorandum to the Air Force Physical Evaluation Board voicing his concern that her medical condition will affect her capabilities to meet deployable requirements. On 27 Jun 11, the MEB Report recommended an Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) for the applicant. On 23 Aug 11, the IPEB Report found the applicant unfit because of “Inappropriate Sinus Tachycardia,” compensable percentage of 10 percent, recommending Discharge with Severance Pay (DWSP). On 30 Aug 11, the applicant did not agree with the IPEB findings and requested a Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB). On 11 Oct 11, the FPEB Report found the applicant unfit because of “Inappropriate Sinus Tachycardia,” compensable percentage of 10 percent, recommending DWSP. The applicant appealed the FPEB findings to the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAF/PC) stating the FPEB hearing resulted in an inaccurate as well as unjust assessment of her current condition. On 19 Apr 12, the Director of SAF/PC advised the applicant that the Board considered her contention for permanent retirement with a disability rating of 40 percent, and concurred with the disposition recommended by the previous boards to discharge her with severance pay with a disability rating of 10 percent. On 28 Aug 12, the applicant was furnished an honorable discharge, and was credited with eight years, seven months, and nine days of active service. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memoranda prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), and the AFBCMR Medical Consultant which are attached at Exhibits C and D. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPFD recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. A review of the applicant's military personnel records revealed that a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) was completed in Jun 11 and referred to the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) for a diagnosis of palpitations. The IPEB, and subsequently a Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB), after reviewing the applicant’s medical records and/or hearing her testimony, recommended discharge with severance pay for the unfitting condition of inappropriate sinus tachycardia with a 10 percent disability rating in accordance with the Department of Defense (DoD) guidance for applying the Veterans Administration Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) guidelines. The applicant non-concurred with the recommendation and appealed to the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAF/PC). SAF/PC reviewed the IPEB and FPEB recommendations, considered her appeal, and upheld the findings of the previous boards. The applicant feels she should receive a disability retirement and a rating for each service connected medical conditions as provided by the DVA on Jun 13. The DoD and DVA disability evaluation systems operate under separate laws. Under Title 10, USC, Chapter 61, DoD Physical Evaluation Boards must determine if a member's condition renders them unfit for continued military service relating to their office, grade, rank or rating at the time of evaluation. The fact that a person may have a medical condition does not mean that the condition is unfitting for continued military service. To be unfitting, the condition must be such that it alone precludes 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. At the time of her processing through the DES, the only condition considered unfitting was her inappropriate sinus tachycardia. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPFD evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. Medical documentation revealed the applicant began to complain of palpitations in 2009 and a referral to cardiology consultation was generated. Medical treatment for palpitations was started by 2009. In 2010 the applicant was disqualified for worldwide duty assignment due to the recurring tachycardia (Inappropriate Sinus Tachycardia). Given the cardiac diagnosis, recurring symptomatology and the worldwide disqualification, the applicant was referred for a MEB. At the conclusion of the FPEB, a determination of Discharge with Severance Pay (DWSP) with a 10 percent disability rating for cardiac palpitations was rendered. Of note is the applicant’s mention of migraine headaches as a medical condition previously identified as a chronic condition that should have been rated. There were no profiles, in the records provided for review, relating to migraine headaches of a prostrating degree of severity or other duty limiting restrictions around the period of service termination. Hence, the migraine headaches, though present at the time of service termination, did not interfere with the performance of the applicant’s assigned duties and did not represent an unfitting medical condition which disqualified the applicant for continued military service. Furthermore, other chronic medical conditions, rated by DVA following release from active duty service, did not represent unfitting medical conditions for continued military service. The DoD Disability Evaluation System, established to maintain a fit and vital fighting force, can by law under Title 10, only offer compensation for those service incurred diseases or injuries which specifically rendered a member unfit for continued active service or were the cause for termination of their career, and then only for the degree of impairment present at the time of separation and not based on future possibilities. The DVA specifically addresses long term medical care, social support and educational assistance. Thus the two systems represent a continuum of medical care and disability compensation that starts with entry on to active duty and extends for the life of the veteran. There was no error or injustice in the final determination of FPEB to rate only the medically disqualifying cardiac condition. A complete copy of the AFBCMR Medical consultant evaluation is at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 21 Sep 15 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). 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 Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) and the AFBCMR Medical Consultant, and adopt their rationale 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-2015-00217 in Executive Session on 4 Nov 15, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-00217 was considered: Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 Jan 15, w/atchs. Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPFD, dated 9 Feb 15. Exhibit D.  Memorandum, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, dated   16 Sep 15. Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Sep 15.