RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 				DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02908

 						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  YES



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His discharge status be changed from Discharged for Disability 
with Severance Pay (DWSP) to medically retired.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

After reviewing his records, and statements from his surgeon, he 
believes a medical retirement is more appropriate because of an 
unsuccessful heart surgery.  He believes this information may have 
been overlooked at the time of his discharge and he did not know 
he had the ability to appeal the decision of the Air Force.  He 
further contends he receives 60% disability from the Department of 
Veteran’s Affairs (DVA), calculated at 20% Carpal Tunnel, 10% 
Tinnitus, 10% Gastroesophageal Reflux, and 30% Atrial 
Fibrillation.

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 25 July 96, the applicant entered the Regular Air Force.

On 28 Jun 04, his commander recommended he not be retained on 
active duty due to the severity of his heart condition.

On 12 Jul 04, the Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) recommended the 
applicant be continued on active duty and his case be referred to 
the Information Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB).

On 23 Jul 04, the IPEB found him unfit to discharge his duties, 
and recommended he be discharged with severance pay, with a 
disability rating of 10%.

On 4 Aug 04, he received notification of his IPEB findings and 
recommended disposition.  He acknowledged the findings the same 
day, indicating he agreed with the disposition, and waived his 
right to a formal PEB hearing.
On 9 Sep 04, the applicant received an honorable discharge with 
narrative reason for separation as “Disability, Severance Pay” and 
was credited with 8 years, 1 month and 15 days of active service.

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/DPFD recommends denial indicating the preponderance of 
evidence reflects there was no error or an injustice in the 
disability process.  It should be noted that the member’s 
application states the DVA has awarded him a combined disability 
rating of 60% for carpal tunnel (right hand), tinnitus, 
gastroesophageal reflux and atrial fibrillation.  The applicant 
does not provide any documentation from the DVA for review.  The 
applicant was not boarded for carpal tunnel, tinnitus or 
gastroesophageal reflux.

The Department of Defense (DoD) and the DVA disability evaluation 
systems operate under separate laws.  Under Title 10, USC, PEBs 
must determine if a member’s condition renders them unfit for 
continued military service relating to their office, grade, rank 
or rating.  The fact that a person may have a medical condition 
does not mean that the condition is necessarily 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.  Further, it must be noted the USAF disability 
boards must rate disabilities based on the member’s condition at 
the time of evaluation; in essence a snapshot of their condition 
at that time.  It is the charge of the DVA to pick up where the AF 
must, by law, leave off.  Under Title 38, the DVA may rate any 
service-connected condition based upon future employability or 
reevaluate based on changes in the severity of a condition.

The complete AFPC/DPFD 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 4 Nov 14 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 not timely filed; however, it is in the 
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

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 
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.

4.  The applicant’s case is adequately documented and it has not 
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will 
materially add to our understanding of the issues involved.  
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.


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-2014-02908 in Executive Session on 21 May 15 under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 8 Jul 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPFD, dated 13 Aug 14.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Nov 14.