RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-03510 INDEX CODE: 108.00 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His flight status and flight pay be reinstated for the period 31 August 2004 through 15 August 2006. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His diagnosis of Meniere’s Syndrome that disqualified him from flying status proved to be a misdiagnosis. There was no attempt made to obtain a second opinion for his diagnosis as is required in cases of disqualifying conditions. Had a correct diagnosis been made with either the initial evaluation or during a second evaluation, he would have received the appropriate treatment and been returned to flying status much sooner. The loss of flight pay, the stress associated with the loss of his career, and the fact that it was necessary to attend requalification training was a tremendous burden on him and his family. In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of a flight surgeon’s memorandum for record (MFR), a chronological list of events surrounding his condition, and pertinent medical and flight records. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is a former member of the Air National Guard who served in an Active Guard Reserve (AGR) position in the grade of master sergeant. According to the flight surgeon’s MFR supplied with his appeal, the applicant reported symptoms of vertigo and hearing loss that interfered with his flying duties between March 2002 and December 2003. On 23 December 2003, the applicant was given the diagnosis of Meniere’s Disease by an ear, nose, and throat (ENT) physician. In August 2004, he was reevaluated by the ENT physician and because the applicant asserted he no longer had symptoms, the physician felt it was reasonable to request a waiver to return him to flying duties. On 8 November 2004, after a waiver was submitted to his command, the applicant was disqualified from flying class III duties in accordance with Air Force Instruction 48-123V2A2.4.1.3. A subsequent ENT evaluation in late 2005 indicates the applicant probably never had true Meniere’s Disease since the applicant expressed he had not experienced any symptoms since August 2004. The attending physician indicated he probably had a prolonged viral infection or suffered adverse effects of severe barotraumas. A waiver was again submitted through his command and he was returned to flying duties in August 2006. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: NGB/A1PS recommends denying the applicant’s request. A1PS states the NGB subject matter expert (NGB/SGPA) indicates the applicant was disqualified from flying duties because of self-admitted symptoms of vertigo and dizziness. SGPA states that under no circumstances would an Air Force member be qualified for any type of flying duty while experiencing these symptoms. Once the applicant made claim to these symptoms, it became the responsibility of the evaluating flight surgeon to determine the root cause of the symptoms. Even though the original diagnosis was later ruled out, the symptoms are what led to the flying restriction. It is SGPA’s opinion that the applicant’s case was appropriately handled due to the self-admitted chronic symptoms of dizziness and vertigo. The complete A1PS evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit B. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He respectfully disagrees with the Air Force advisory opinion. He was informed at the time he was diagnosed with Meniere’s Disease that it was a career ending condition. His unit completed paperwork for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB); however, months passed without him hearing anything. After about a year he discovered that the MEB process had not been done correctly, that a second medical opinion was required before initiating an MEB, and that he was supposed to have had the opportunity to write a letter of intent stating what option he would like to pursue. At that point, he was told that it did not matter as the time limit had expired on the initial data/paperwork and the whole process would have to be started over. It was around this time the flight surgeon indicated he did not have Meniere’s Disease. When further testing confirmed the diagnosis, he was cleared to fly again. He remained on flying status until his retirement on 1 October 2009. If he had been diagnosed correctly, he would have known his condition was only temporary and been able to return to flying status much sooner than he did, which would have resulted in no loss of flight pay. He had accumulated the 15 years of flying status required to receive continuous flight pay; however, his misdiagnosis of a medically disqualifying condition caused him to be wrongfully denied continuous flight pay. He believes he is entitled to the flight pay he was denied between 31 August 2004 and 15 August 2006. In support of appeal, he has included copies of his flight records to prove his return to flying status. The applicant’s rebuttal, with attachments, is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ 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 an injustice. We note the applicant’s contentions that his case was mishandled, in that he was misdiagnosed with Meniere’s Disease and he was not processed through the Disability Evaluation System (DES) properly; however, medical documentation verifies he was suffering with symptoms of dizziness and vertigo which appropriately led to his flying restriction. The applicant speculates that had he been appropriately diagnosed, he would have been treated and returned to flying status sooner and have been entitled to flight pay; however, we are not persuaded this would have been the case. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that 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 this application in Executive Session on 4 February 2010, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, Panel Chair XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, Member XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, Member The following documentary evidence for AFBCMR Docket Number BC- 2008-03510 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 16 Sep 08, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Letter, NGB/A1PS, dated 2 Dec 09, w/atch. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Dec 09. Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 24 Jan 10.