ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 97-00922
INDEX NUMBER: 110.02, 108.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
The decision of the Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB) be
reversed and she be returned to active duty, with back pay and
allowance, and all other benefits to which she is entitled.
___________________________________________________________________
RESUME OF CASE:
Applicant’s request was considered by the AFBCMR on 15 January 1998.
After review of the evidence presented, the Board determined
sufficient evidence had been presented to demonstrate the existence of
probable error or injustice warranting reevaluation of the applicant’s
medical condition. The Board recommended that the applicant’s medical
condition be reevaluated at Wilford Hall USAF Medical Center and that
the results of the evaluation be forwarded to the Board (Exhibits A
through F).
___________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
In accordance with the Board’s request, the applicant was evaluated at
Wilford Hall USAF Medical Center on 9 September 1998. The final
diagnosis established in her case was: Axis I - (1) History of
psychotic disorder not otherwise specified. Diagnosis from 1993. The
patient currently does not endorse symptoms and her current behavior
is not supportive of a current diagnosis of psychotic disorder not
otherwise specified. Although there is evidence for suspicion and
paranoia, it does not rise to the level of meeting a diagnosis at this
time. Axis II - Personality disorder not otherwise specified by
history. With the applicant’s clinical history and current clinical
picture, the evaluator stated he would not recommend the applicant be
considered qualified for worldwide active duty. Therefore, he
recommended that she not be returned to active duty.
The complete evaluation is attached at Exhibit G.
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Counsel disagreed with the recommendation provided by the evaluator at
the Psychiatry Clinic and stated that she believes the applicant would
do well on active duty.
Counsel provided her expanded comments addressing specific findings in
the Psychiatry Narrative Summary/Evaluation.
Her complete statement is at Exhibit I.
By letter, dated 26 May 1999, counsel withdrew from the applicant’s
case. (Exhibit J)
___________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. In earlier findings in this case, the Board determined that prior
to the applicant’s removal from the Temporary Disability Retired List
(TDRL), she had been denied the opportunity to be evaluated to
determine if she was fit for return to active duty. Therefore, the
Board recommended evaluation of the applicant’s current medical
condition and that the results of the evaluation be provided for the
Board’s review.
2. In accordance with the Board’s request, the applicant was
evaluated on 9 September 1998. Based on her clinical history and her
current clinical picture, the evaluator did not recommend that she be
considered qualified for worldwide active duty and did not recommend
that she be returned to active duty.
3. Counsel’s disagreement with the results of the medical evaluation
and her contentions that the applicant is fit for duty in the Air
Force and that she has been performing the same job in a civilian
capacity as she performed while on active duty are duly noted.
However, after careful consideration of the evidence provided, as well
as the current medical evaluation, we are not persuaded that the
applicant is now medically fit to function within the rigors of the
military environment. In addition, we find that no evidence has been
presented that would lead us to believe the diagnoses made by
competent medical authority either at the time of applicant’s removal
from the TDRL and subsequent separation or during the most recent
evaluation were based on erroneous information or contrary to accepted
medical principle and the state of the applicant’s condition at that
time. In view of the foregoing, and in the absence of persuasive
evidence to the contrary, we find that there is no basis upon which to
favorably consider the applicant’s request.
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 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 17 May 1999, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Patricia J. Zarodkiewicz, Panel Chair
Mr. Edward H. Parker, Member
Mr. Patrick R. Wheeler, Member
The following additional documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit G. Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 23 Oct 98, w/atchs.
Exhibit H. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 6 Nov 98.
Exhibit I. Letter from Counsel, dated 18 Nov 98.
Exhibit J. Letter from Counsel, dated 26 May 99.
PATRICIA J. ZARODKIEWICZ
Panel Chair
The complete evaluation is attached at Exhibit G. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Counsel disagreed with the recommendation provided by the evaluator at the Psychiatry Clinic and stated that she believes the applicant would do well on active duty. Therefore, the Board recommended evaluation of the applicant’s current medical condition and that the results of the evaluation be provided for the Board’s review. ...
The complete evaluation is attached at Exhibit G. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Counsel disagreed with the recommendation provided by the evaluator at the Psychiatry Clinic and stated that she believes the applicant would do well on active duty. Therefore, the Board recommended evaluation of the applicant’s current medical condition and that the results of the evaluation be provided for the Board’s review. ...
c L/ Director Air Force AIR FORCE IN THE MATTER OF: RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS DOCKET NUMBER: 97-00922 JUN 2 5 1998 HEARING DESIRED: YES 1 4 APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The decision of the Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB) be reversed and she be returned to active duty, with back pay and allowances, and all other benefits to which she is entitled. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant reviewed this application and opined that the applicant...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-00066
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend the diagnosis of borderline personality disorder (BPD) be removed from her records at this time. _________________________________________________________________ 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...
Based on the current mental health evaluation provided, the BCMR Medical Consultant states that the applicant would not be a good risk for return to active duty and his appeal for reinstatement should not be favorably recommended (Exhibit J). ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluations and commented that the testing and evaluation results from Wilford Hall verify that he is...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-01418 INDEX CODE 110.02 100.06 xxxxxxxxxxx COUNSEL: No xxxxxxxxxxx HEARING DESIRED: Yes _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The narrative reason on her DD Form 214 be changed from “Personality Disorder” to one that more accurately reflects her diagnosis and her military record reflect she is fit for military service. Since the...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-01418 INDEX CODE 110.02 100.06 xxxxxxxxxxx COUNSEL: No xxxxxxxxxxx HEARING DESIRED: Yes _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The narrative reason on her DD Form 214 be changed from “Personality Disorder” to one that more accurately reflects her diagnosis and her military record reflect she is fit for military service. Since the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120016620
The PEB recommended a 50% combined disability rating and permanent disability retirement. The PEB recommended permanent disability retirement at the rate of 50%. The applicant is entitled to correction of his records to show "PTSD, chronic" instead of "Anxiety Disorder - NOS" as a disabling condition that did not meet retention standards and is rated at 50%, effective 22 December 2011, the date of the applicant's original retirement.
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant reviewed this application and indicated that the applicant developed a bipolar disorder during the course of her active duty service, a condition which had not 2 AFBCMR 97- 01142 J been diagnosed prior to her service (as suggested by the IPEB) nor which was aggravated by "willful noncompliance" as the FPEB found. The Medical Consultant is of the opinion that the applicant should receive relief from the disability evaluation system and have...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-01037
The Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) found both her military and social impairment to be rated as considerable. Thus, the MEB placed her on the TDRL with a 30 percent disability rating. However, after she was reevaluated, the IPEB found the applicants medical condition had improved and recommended she be removed from the TDRL and separated with a 10 percent disability rating with severance pay. The Medical Consultants complete evaluation is at Exhibit...