RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01330
INDEX NUMBER: 145.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
The narrative reason for separation on his DD Form 214 be changed from
disability, existing prior to service, to disability, service connected and
his reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His disability did not exist prior service (EPTS) and his reenlistment
eligibility (RE) code is too harsh and prevents him from reenlisting.
In support of his request, the applicant submits a copy of his DD Form 214,
Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, a copy of a letter
from the Department of Veterans Affairs, a copy of a letter from his
doctor, a personal statement, a letter of support, and a copy of AF Form
618, Medical Board Report.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant entered active duty on 5 April 2000, completed basic
training, and became an Aircrew Life Support Apprentice. On 26 November
2001, the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) found the applicant
unfit and determined that the applicant’s condition existed prior to
service and recommended discharge under other than Chapter 61. In their
decision, the IPEB commented, “The IPEB notes symptoms of member’s
condition surfaced within the first 2-3 months of his entry on active duty
and is natural progression of his disease. The Board also notes his
personality disorder and opines it significantly affects the severity of
his panic disorder. The IPEB opines his social and industrial adaptability
impairment rating would best be described as mild IAW DoD an VASRD
guidelines (were it not for the personality disorder). On 18 December
2001, the applicant accepted the findings and recommendations of the IPEB
and waived his right to a formal hearing. He separated on 5 February 2002,
for physical disability due to a condition that existed prior to service
with 1 year, 10 months and 1 day total active service.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:
The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial. The applicant was diagnosed
with both a panic disorder and personality disorder that interfered with
the performance of duty and led to discharge from the Air Force. Because
the applicant’s chronic panic disorder began so soon after entering active
duty (within 90 days), the Informal Physical Evaluation Board determined
that the condition existed prior to entering service. According to DoD
instruction 1332.38, signs or symptoms of chronic disease identified so
soon after the day of entry on military service (usually within 180 days),
that the disease could not have originated in that short a period, will be
accepted as proof that the disease manifested prior to entrance into active
military service.
Action and disposition in this case are proper and equitable reflecting
compliance with Air Force directives that implement the law.
The BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:
Applicant responded and states that his medical condition did not exist
prior to service. He was very active in sports before entering the
military and had no problems with anxiety. His family and friends know
that he did not have this condition prior to entering the military and he
can provide additional supporting documentation from them. He completed
basic training with no problems or administrative actions taken against
him.
The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit E.
_________________________________________________________________
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. Evidence has not been provided in
support of his appeal, which would lead us to believe that a change to his
RE code or narrative reason is warranted. Therefore, we agree with the
opinions and recommendation of the BCMR Medical Consultant that the
applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, in
the absence of persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling
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 2 September 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
Mr. Mike Novel, Member
Mr. James A. Wolffe, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered for AFBCMR Docket Number
BC-2003-01330:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 10 Jan 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 6 Aug 03.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBC , dated 8 Aug 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit F. Letter, Applicant, dated 18 Aug 03.
MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03089
The determination that it existed prior to service was based on his report that the condition existed since the 7th grade. Exhibit C. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 30 Apr 04. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 May 04.
On 22 November 1999, a Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB) convened and based on the diagnosis of panic disorder with agoraphobia, definite social and industrial adaptability impairment, DVA Diagnostic Code 9412, recommended the applicant be retained on the TDRL with a 30% compensable disability rating. On 25 May 2001, the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Board (SAFPB) agreed that the medical evidence indicated that the applicant’s condition was permanent, relatively stable on...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-02666
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. BCMR Medical Consultant’s Note: The Methacholine Challenge Test is a method of diagnosing asthma, especially in adults where their medical history of asthma is uncertain and routine pulmonary function tests are normal. The Methacholine Challenge Test is considered accurate, but has certain limitations and should not be relied on for a diagnosis in a patient with symptoms strongly suggesting asthma and/or...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01789
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She was diagnosed with thyroid cancer, which provided clinical evidence that she had a real medical problem that produced the symptoms and conditions used to suggest the diagnosis of Dysthymia and Personality Disorder. She was diagnosed with thyroid cancer only four months after her discharge from the Air Force. The BCMR Medical Consultant concludes that the applicant’s diagnosis of personality...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00222
After considering the applicant’s medical records, including information pertaining to the applicant’s treatment for the lacunar stroke, on 27 February 2002, the IPEB recommended the applicant be permanently retired because of physical disability with a compensable rating of 30% for major depressive disorder associated with myofascial pain. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant is of the opinion that no change in...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01954
The fact that the applicant has been granted service connected disability from the DVA does not entitle her to Air Force disability compensation. Applicant contends her psychiatric condition was aggravated by her Air Force Reserve service. We believe it is interesting to note that although the applicant was diagnosed with personality disorder while on active duty and reported symptoms of depressed mood at the time of her separation examination, she did not seek medical attention nor was...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01684
_________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: All of his medical records concerning a 6 November 2002 psychiatric consult and all follow-up consults were not available for the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB). On 5 February 2001, an Informal PEB (IPEB) found him unfit due to Major Depressive Disorder with definite social and industrial adaptability impairment and recommended he be placed on the TDRL with a 30% rating. The BCMR Medical...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02345
The PEB recommended that he be discharged. On 31 Jul 01, the IPEB found him unfit for further military service based on a diagnosis of asthma and recommended that he be discharged with severance pay, with a compensable rating of 10%. He was diagnosed with asthma based on a clinical history consistent with the disease and positive methacholine bronchoprovocation testing.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02986
The Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) was convened on 22 March 1990 and concluded her condition, Bipolar Disorder, manic, moderate, acute, with considerable impairment of social and industrial adaptability, existed prior to service without service aggravation and recommended the applicant be discharged with severance pay. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant states that evidence of the record indicates...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2005-03361
DPPPWB states JAJM has reviewed the applicant’s case and determined that there were no legal errors requiring corrective action regarding his non-judicial punishment and recommended the Board deny his request. Evidence of record clearly shows he was on a “4T” profile for over a year, yet he got an assignment. Furthermore, in May 2005 he did not even have enough retainability in the Air Force to be reassigned to Korea.