RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-01235
            INDEX CODE:  108.00
            COUNSEL:  None

                 HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be granted a medical retirement.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was treated for a psychiatric disorder while  in  military  service.   He
should have been medically treated for anxiety,  stress  and  depression  as
well as a service-connected neurological disability of his extremities.   He
was suffering from a trembling of hands and head  (nerves)  which  was  very
noticeable throughout his military tour.  He was never  referred  to  see  a
neurologist for an evaluation and treatment, so his condition became  worse.
 If he would have received treatment for this condition  while  in  the  Air
Force it would have been controlled, and he would not have suffered so  much
for over 30 years due to this service-connected condition.  His  psychiatric
disorder, anxiety, stress  and  depression,  and  neurological  condition  –
nerves  (trembling  of  hands  and  head)  were  an  embarrassment  to   him
throughout his military tour and present-day.

In support of the application, the applicant submits a  statement  from  his
mother, a copy of a letter from the Department of Veterans Affairs,  a  copy
of his medical doctor’s business card, and a copy  of  a  four-page  medical
report.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 12 August 1971, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air  Force  at  the
age of 20 in the grade of airman basic.  He was  progressively  promoted  to
the grade of sergeant effective and with a date of rank  of  31  July  1973.
On 11 August 1975, he was honorably discharged under the provisions  of  AFM
39-10 (Expiration Term of Active Obligated Service).   He  had  completed  a
total of four years of active duty service.

The following is a resume of performance reports commencing with the  report
closing 6 March 1972:

      PERIOD ENDING    PROMOTION RECOMMENDATION

      6 March 1972           9
      6 March 1973           9
      14 September 1973           9
      14 September 1974           9

In an entry in the applicant’s chronological record of medical  care,  dated
12 February 1975, the  examiner  interviewed  the  applicant  and  discussed
problem of impotence.  The examiner prescribed  medication  and  recommended
follow-up appointment.  In an entry in the applicant’s chronological  record
of medical care, dated 4 March 1975, the examiner indicated the  applicant’s
improvement on prescribed medications, diagnosed schizoid  personality,  and
recommended a follow-up appointment.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant opines no change in the records is warranted.

The BCMR Medical Consultant states  available  medical  documentation  shows
the applicant manifested  long  standing  symptoms  of  anxiety  and  social
relational problems diagnosed as  Schizoid  Personality  Disorder.   Despite
these problems, his personnel file shows  that  he  performed  his  military
duties in an outstanding manner.  The BCMR  Medical  Consultant  notes  that
following discharge, the  applicant  continued  to  experience  symptoms  of
anxiety, depression and received continued psychiatric therapy and  support.
 The BCMR Medical Consultant affirms evidence of the  record  indicates  the
applicant’s anxiety difficulties predated entry into  military  service  and
he further manifested symptoms of  personality  disorder,  a  constitutional
problem that  existed  prior  to  service  and  does  not  qualify  for  DoD
disability benefits.

The BCMR Medical Consultant notes the applicant asserts that the  Air  Force
medical personnel failed to evaluate and treat his  tremor;  however,  there
is no evidence in the service  medical  records  that  he  sought  care  for
tremor or identified it  to  medical  personnel  as  a  bothersome  symptom.
Furthermore,  his  diagnosis  is  essential  tremor,   a   benign,   usually
hereditary  condition,  that  has  no  cure  and  for  which  treatment   is
symptomatic.  The BCMR Medical  Consultant  explains  anxiety  significantly
aggravates the condition and the applicant was treated for anxiety while  in
service.  The applicant received effective  symptomatic  treatment  for  his
tremor post-service.

The BCMR Medical Consultant states the Military Service disability  systems,
operating under Title 10, and  the  Department  of  Veterans  Affairs  (DVA)
disability system, operating under Title 38, are complementary  systems  not
intended to be duplicative.  The Military Disability Evaluation System,  can
only offer compensation for those diseases or  injuries  which  specifically
rendered a member unfit for continued active service,  were  the  cause  for
termination of their career, and then only  for  the  degree  of  impairment
present at the time of separation and not  based  on  future  possibilities.
The mere presence of a medical condition  does  not  quality  a  member  for
disability evaluation.   For  an  individual  to  be  considered  unfit  for
military  service  there  must  be  a  medical   condition   that   prevents
performance of any work commensurate with rank and experience  or  precludes
assignment  to  military  duties.   In  this   instance,   the   applicant’s
conditions did not interfere with performance of duties and did not  warrant
evaluation  in  the  disability  evaluation  system.   Further,  personality
disorders are not disease, but are enduring  patterns  of  maladjustment  in
the   individual’s   personality   structure   which   are   not   medically
disqualifying or unfitting but may  render  the  individual  unsuitable  for
further military service and may be a cause  for  administrative  action  by
the individual’s unit commander.  In the  applicant’s  case,  his  condition
did not interfere with performance of duties while he  was  on  active  duty
and did not warrant administrative discharge.

The BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation, with attachments,  is  at  Exhibit
C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 28 January 2005, copy of the Air Force evaluation was  forwarded  to  the
applicant for review and comment within 30 days.   As  of  this  date,  this
office has received no response (Exhibit D).

_________________________________________________________________

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 probable error or injustice.  After a thorough  review  of  the
evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we  are  not  persuaded  that
his honorable discharge should be changed to a medical retirement.   At  the
time of his discharge, no physical or psychiatric diagnoses that might  have
led  to  a  medical  discharge  were  noted.   The  applicant  completed   a
contractual period of enlistment and was  separated  honorably.   Therefore,
he was appropriately allowed  to  separate  on  expiration  of  his  service
commitment without being considered  in  the  medical  discharge  evaluation
system.   In  support  of  his  claim,  the  applicant  provided  a  medical
assessment  and  rating  he  received   from   a   neurology   clinic,   and
documentation showing he is currently applying to the DVA for  compensation.
 The applicant’s contention that he should have  been  medically  discharged
is noted; however, in our opinion, the detailed  comments  provided  by  the
AFBCMR Medical Consultant adequately address these allegations.   Therefore,
we are in complete agreement with the comments  and  recommendation  of  the
AFBCMR Medical Consultant and adopt his  rationale  as  the  basis  for  our
decision that the applicant has not been the victim of either  an  error  or
injustice.  The applicant has not provided  persuasive  evidence  sustaining
his burden that he suffered either an error or an injustice;  therefore,  we
find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought.

_________________________________________________________________

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 9 March 2005 under the provisions of AFI 37-2603:

            Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Panel Chair
            Ms. Ann-Cecile M. McDermott, Panel Member
            Mr. Wallace F. Beard Jr., Panel Member

The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2004-
01235 was considered:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 12 April 2004, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR Med Consultant, dated 21 Jan 05.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR , dated 28 Jan 05.




                 KATHLEEN F. GRAHAM
                 Panel Chair