RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 				DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-04031

XXXXXXXXXXXXX					COUNSEL:  NONE

							HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His discharge with a 50 percent disability rating be increased to a 75 percent disability rating retroactive to 28 June 2014.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

In August 2015, the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) reevaluated his unfitting condition of diabetes and increased the rating from 20 percent to 60 percent.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

According to AF Form 356, Findings and Recommended Disposition of USAF Physical Evaluation Board, dated 4 September 2013, the informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) found the applicant unfit based on the diagnoses of myopathy (40 percent disability rating) and diabetes mellitus type II (20 percent disability rating).  Accordingly, the IPEB recommended the applicant be permanently retired with a combined disability rating of 50 percent in accordance with Department of Defense guidance for applying the Veterans Administration Schedule for Rating Disabilities guidelines.

In a letter dated 27 November 2013, the applicant’s counsel requested a one-time rating reconsideration, asking for a rating increase for his diabetes from 20 percent to 40 percent.

In a memorandum dated 10 February 2014, the DVA advised the applicant that no change was warranted in the prior decision of a proposed evaluation of 20 percent for diabetes mellitus type II.

According to Special Order No. ACD-01179 dated 6 March 2014, the applicant was permanently disability retired effective 28 June 2014, with a compensable percentage of 50 percent.

According to the DVA rating decision dated 13 August 2015, the applicant was informed the evaluation of diabetes was increased to 60 percent.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPFDD recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice.  The applicant was processed through the Disability Evaluation System (DES) in 2013 for the unfitting conditions of myopathy and diabetes mellitus type II.  He was found unfit and recommended for permanent retirement for reasons of physical disability.  The applicant was relieved from active duty on 27 June 2014, and permanently retired with a combined compensable disability rating of 50 percent effective 28 June 2014.

At the time of his processing through the DES, disability ratings were assigned by the DVA.  Upon review of the medical documentation available at the time his case was being processed, the DVA awarded the applicant 20 percent for his unfitting condition of diabetes mellitus and 40 percent for his unfitting condition of myopathy.  The applicant exercised his right for a one-time rating reconsideration, requesting a rating increase for his diabetes from 20 percent to 40 percent.  The DVA reviewed his request and determined no change was warranted.  As a matter of information, the Air Force and the DVA disability systems operate under separate laws.  Under the Air Force system (Title 10, United States Code [U.S.C.]), Physical Evaluation Boards must determine whether a member’s medical condition renders them unfit for duty and apply the rating provided by the DVA at the time of disability processing (a snapshot in time).  That rating determines the final disposition (discharge with severance pay, placement on the temporary disability retired list, permanent retirement) and is not subject to change after the service member has separated.  Under the DVA system (Title 38, U.S.C), the member may be reevaluated over the years and their rating may be increased or decreased based on changes in the member’s medical condition.  However, an increase or decrease in rating by the DVA after separation from the service does not warrant a change in the total compensable rating awarded at the time of the member’s separation.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPFDD 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 12 April 2016, 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 Air Force OPR 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-2015-04031 in Executive Session on 13 September 2016 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-04031 was considered:

Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 11 September 2015, w/atchs.
Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPFDD, dated 20 January 2016.
Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 12 April 2016.

Pursuant to paragraph 1 of AFI 36-2603 (Title 32 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 865.1), it is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled matter with regard to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-04031.