ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 97-01283
INDEX CODE: 110.00, 108.00
COUNSEL: DVA
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His voluntary separation be changed to a medical retirement.
_________________________________________________________________
RESUME OF CASE:
On 26 February 1998, the Board considered and denied a similar appeal
by the applicant. A summary of the evidence considered by the Board
and the rationale for its decision is set forth in the Record of
Proceedings, which is attached at Exhibit E.
The applicant provided additional new evidence pertaining to his
medical condition for possible reconsideration of his application
(Exhibit F).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Subsequent to the June 1993 incident, he started to suffer depression,
which led to his request for early separation. At that time, he did
not know he was suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).
He did not seek any medical help for his mental condition. He
separated from the Air Force in June 1995 and in December 1995, he
tried to commit suicide. In March 1995, he was diagnosed with severe
major depression and PTSD by the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA).
He has been treated for other medical conditions, which were found to
have happened while he was on active duty from June 1979 - June 1995.
Due to his physical and mental condition, he was not thinking clearly
and made irrational decisions. In further support of his appeal, he
has provided additional medical documents. A complete copy of the
applicant's submission is at Exhibit F.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
In earlier findings, we determined that there was insufficient
evidence to warrant any corrective action regarding the applicant’s
request that his records be corrected to reflect he was medically
retired. We have reviewed the applicant’s most recent submissions and
find them insufficient to warrant a reversal of our previous
determination in this case. While we noted that the applicant may
have been treated for various medical conditions while on active duty,
we find no evidence which shows to our satisfaction that he was ever
considered not medically qualified for continued military service or
found unfit to perform the duties of his rank and office, which is, by
law, the basis for disability processing. Based on the preponderance
of the evidence of record, we believe the applicant has failed to meet
his burden of proof to overcome the presumption of fitness.
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we again find
no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this
appeal.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of probable 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 29 March 1999 under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Ms. Martha Maust, Panel Chair
Mr. William E. Edwards, Member
Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit E. Record of Proceedings, dated 6 Mar 98.
Exhibit F. Letter from applicant, dated 11 Jun 98, w/atchs.
MARTHA MAUST
Panel Chair
A summary of the evidence considered by the Board and the rationale for its decision is set forth in the Record of Proceedings, which is attached at Exhibit E. The applicant provided additional new evidence pertaining to his medical condition for possible reconsideration of his application (Exhibit F). He has been treated for other medical conditions, which were found to have happened while he was on active duty from June 1979 - June 1995. ...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1997-01283A
A summary of the evidence considered by the Board and the rationale for its decision is set forth in the Record of Proceedings, which is attached at Exhibit E. The applicant provided additional new evidence pertaining to his medical condition for possible reconsideration of his application (Exhibit F). He has been treated for other medical conditions, which were found to have happened while he was on active duty from June 1979 - June 1995. ...
A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The Military Personnel Management Specialist, Separations Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, states that the case has been reviewed for separation processing and there are no errors or irregularities causing an injustice to the applicant. We note that prior to the applicant’s separation from the Air Force, she received a commander-directed mental health evaluation and was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed...
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS SECOND ADDENDbPl TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 9 5 - 0 0 2 3 8 COUNSEL: None m2r 1998 HEARING DESIRED: No APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to show he completed his contract with the Air Force (4 years of active duty service and 2 years of inactive reserve service) , he was awarded the Good Conduct Medal (GCM) , he be awarded all monies due as a result of the foregoing corrections, and, he be...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03658
The applicant’s performance reports are provided at Exhibit B. Available records pertaining to the applicant’s medical issues are at Exhibit B, and the AFBCMR Medical Consultant provides medical details in his advisory at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The AFBCMR Medical Consultant’s review of the applicant’s service records revealed no reference to participation in combat or events similar to those described by the...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC 2010 02989
On behalf of the applicant, an accredited veterans administration claims agent/veterans advocate, indicated subsequent to the Boards original decision, he was diagnosed with an aggravated chronic mental health condition and was awarded a combined compensable disability rating of 50 percent (Major Depressive Disorder) by the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA). In this respect, we note that while the two supporting statements indicate the applicant suffers from major depressive disorder...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1998-01107
It must be noted that Major Depressive Disorder was not diagnosed prior to his retirement. Review of medical records does not disclose any evidence to support correction of records from length of service retirement to disability retirement or to override the OGD. Based on his overall record of performance and noting the recommendations from his commanders, we recommend that the applicant’s record be corrected to reflect that he retired in the grade of lieutenant colonel.
Review of medical records does not disclose any evidence to support correction of records from length of service retirement to disability retirement or to override the OGD. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice warranting correcting the applicant’s records to show that he served satisfactory in the grade of lieutenant colonel pursuant to Title 10, USC, Section 1370(a); and that he retired in that grade. Based on his...
On 19 May 97, an MEB found the applicant not world-wide qualified and recommended she be referred to an Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB). He diagnosed her as having a personality disorder, not otherwise specified, and recommended administrative separation. On 9 Nov 98, the IPEB found her fit with an adjustment disorder which existed prior to service (EPTS) at the USAFA and recommended she be returned to duty.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-00441
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPD recommends denial. One report states the applicant called for emergency intervention in the security guard incident and the other states he did not see the body but was shaken by all the blood. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or...