RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS. IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-00988 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His discharge be corrected to reflect a medical rating. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He recently received a 20% disability rating from the Department of Veterans Affairs (DAV) as a result of ankle surgery while he served in the United States Air Force. He is seeking back payment from the DVA and if the condition occurred in the Air Force and still exists today, then it must have existed on the day of his separation. In support of his request, the applicant has provided a copy of the letter awarding him 20% disability with the DVA. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 22 May 91, the applicant entered the Regular Air Force. On 6 Nov 94, the applicant was placed under general anesthetic and an open reduction/internal fixation operation was performed on the applicant’s right ankle. On 10 Oct 95, the applicant injured his right ankle playing football. On 19 Oct 95, the applicant was put on a three month temporary physical profile based on the 10 Oct 95 ankle injury. On 4 Feb 00, the applicant was furnished an Honorable discharge, and was credited with 8 years, 8 months, and 13 days of active service. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the BCMR Medical Consultant which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. They opine the burden of proof of error or injustice by the Military Department regarding the applicant’s reason for discharge has not been met. If the sole objective is to document that an injury and treatment of an injury occurred during military service, then this document may facilitate that process. It is unclear whether the applicant believes he should have received a medical discharge or simply seeks proof that a particular medical condition existed during his military service. If the applicant’s goal is to change the effective date of payments established by the DVA, then he may provide the same medical documentation provided for this review, along with the assistance of a Veterans Service Organization, as proof of an injury sustained during his military service. However, the applicant is advised that ratings are based upon level of functional impairment present at the time of examination; meaning if there is no discernable functional impairment during a VA Compensation & Pension examination, a condition may be still be considered service-connected, but rated at 0% [without payments] if the examiner finds no discernable functional impairment meeting a minimum 10% rating at the time of examination. If the applicant’s argument is interpreted as deserving of a medical discharge, he is advised that the military Disability Evaluation System (DES), established to maintain a fit and vital fighting force, can by law, under Title 10, United States Code (U.S.C.), 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. Department of Defense Instruction 1332.32, Physical Disability Evaluation, Enclosure 3, Part 3, Standards For Determining Unfitness Due To Physical Disability Or Medical Disqualification, paragraph E3.P3.2.1, in effect at the time of the applicant’s discharge, reads:” A Service member shall be considered unfit when the evidence establishes that the member, due to physical disability, is unable to reasonably perform the duties of his or her office, grade, rank, or rating (hereafter called duties) to include duties during a remaining period of Reserve obligation.” Although the previous Instruction may have since been set aside, the essence of the policy is retained under a more recent publication, DoDI 1332.18, Disability Evaluation System, August 5, 2014, and include two additional criteria for determining unfitness, which read: “A Service member may also be considered unfit when the evidence establishes that: (1) The Service member’s disability represents a decided medical risk to the health of the member or to the welfare or safety of other members; or (2) The Service member’s disability imposes unreasonable requirements on the military to maintain or protect the Service member. Although the evidence indicates the applicant was, at least once, given a waiver from the weight management program, and required surgical treatment of an ankle injury in 1994 and 1995, no evidence is supplied to indicate that he should have received a medical discharge, or that his fitness failures could be mitigated solely to his medical condition(s). It should be noted the cycle ergometry and measurement of heart rate over time was the principle method of determining cardiovascular fitness at the time. With respect to evidentiary standard for determining unfitness because of disability, under the new DoDI 1332.18, “The Secretary of the Military Department concerned must cite objective evidence in the record, as distinguished from personal opinion, speculation, or conjecture, to determine a Service member is unfit because of disability.” The Medical Consultant observed that despite the applicant’s ankle injury, back strain, and surgical procedures, he was consistently returned to perform his normal satellite operator duties. Additionally, no evidence is supplied to show profile restrictions were imposed of a sufficient level and duration due to any medical condition to warrant a medical discharge. On the other hand, operating under a different set of laws (Title 38, U.S.C.), with a different purpose, the Department of Veterans Affairs (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. 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 one or more medical conditions that were service-connected, but not proven militarily unfitting at the time of release from military service. The DVA is also empowered to conduct periodic re-evaluations for the purpose of adjusting the disability rating awards (increase or decrease) as the level of impairment from a given service connected medical condition may vary (improve or worsen, affecting future employability) over the lifetime of the veteran. A complete copy of the BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the BCMR Medical Consultation was forwarded to the applicant on 28 Oct 15 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 its 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-2015-00988 in Executive Session on 9 Dec 15 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-00988 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 28 Feb 15, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 16 Oct 15. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Oct 15.