RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02025
            INDEX NUMBER: 100.00

      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  MICHAEL J. CALABRO

      XXXXXXX    HEARING DESIRED:  YES

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  19 Sep 06

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.    All references to a diagnosis of personality  disorder  or  adjustment
disorder, not otherwise specified, be removed from his records.

2.    The SF Form 600,  Chronological  Record  of  Medical  Care,  dated  29
October 2000, be removed from his records.

3.    The SF Form 88, Report  of  Medical  Examination,  dated  10 September
2000, be amended.

4.    His records be corrected to show that on 30  June  2001,  he  was  not
voluntarily transferred to  the  Retired  Reserve,  but  on  that  date,  he
retired by reason of physical disability, with a 70%  rating,  and  that  he
receive all retroactive retirement pay.

5.    He be reimbursed for all  medical  expenses  incurred,  including  any
medical insurance premiums paid, from 30 June 2001 to 90 days following  the
date his records are corrected  and  he  is  placed  him  on  the  permanent
retired list.

_________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His career was prematurely ended by  a  medical  separation  which  resulted
from post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), caused  by  homosexual  assaults
and intimidation by a  supervisor  in  violation  of  the  Uniform  Code  of
Military Justice (UCMJ) and substantiated by an Air Force Investigation.

The applicant’s counsel states, in  part,  that  the  Air  Force  failed  to
properly diagnose and treat the applicant’s  medical  conditions.   Further,
the Air Force improperly and without scientific basis, determined  that  the
applicant  was  the  cause  of  his  medical  condition,  by  virtue  of   a
personality disorder which was not present at his entry  into  active  duty,
but which  the  Air  Force  contended  did  not  rise  to  the  level  of  a
disability.  Further, the applicant’s transfer to the  Retired  Reserve  was
coerced, since he was threatened with return  to  the  same  environment  of
sexual harassment, or loss of all accrued benefits  for  failure  to  attend
Reserve drills, if he  did  not  request  to  be  assigned  to  the  Retired
Reserve.  By virtue of the classification of his condition as a  personality
disorder,  inaccurate  and  highly  prejudicial  medical   information   was
erroneously placed in his official military record.

In support of the appeal, counsel submits an affidavit from  the  applicant,
extracts from the applicant’s military records, and Department  of  Veterans
Affairs (DVA) rating decisions.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Prior to transferring to the Air Force Reserve on 10 August 1990,  applicant
had prior service in the Marine Corps, the Army National Guard and the  Army
Reserve.  He reenlisted in the Air Force Reserve on 10 December 1995, for  a
period of six years.  On 9 October 2000, he underwent a retirement  physical
and was not found medically qualified for world wide duty.  On  29  November
2000, he requested to be transferred to the Retired  Reserve,  effective  30
June  2001.   His  request  was  approved  and  on  30  June  2001,  he  was
transferred to the Retired Reserve.  He will be eligible to receive  retired
pay on 27 April 2009.

On 30 Jul 2003, the DVA awarded him a compensable disability rating  of  70%
for PTSD with schizotypical features.  On 7 January 2004, the DVA  increased
his rating to 100%.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR  Medical  Consultant  recommends  the  application  be  denied  and
states, in part,  that  the  evidence  of  record  indicates  the  applicant
experienced  significant  psychiatric  difficulties  unrelated  to  military
service for many  years  including  personality  disorder  and  symptoms  of
depression and symptoms suggestive of PTSD  related  to  childhood  traumas.
The applicant  was  twice  hospitalized  for  symptoms  of  depression  with
suicidal ideation in 1984 and 1990, and subsequently  placed  on  disability
from his civilian occupation in  1993  for  psychiatric  disability  due  to
schizotypical  personality  disorder  aggravated  by  work.   He  repeatedly
failed to accurately disclose significant aspects of his medical  background
during periodic evaluations and on a security clearance document.  Had  this
information  been  properly  revealed  by  the  applicant  at  the  time  he
completed these examinations, it is likely he would have been  rejected  for
enlistment  in  the   Air   Force   Reserves   in   1990   or   subsequently
administratively separated due to the  disqualifying  history  of  recurrent
hospitalizations and disability unemployment  due  to  psychiatric  illness.
Concealing significant information on medical examinations  and  a  security
clearance form is  considered  misconduct  and  grounds  for  administrative
discharge.  Although the applicant may exhibit symptoms of PTSD of  variable
degree  combined  with   symptoms   of   his   personality   disorder,   the
preponderance of evidence indicates the main  underlying  condition  is  the
applicant’s personality disorder.  Whether the  incidents  while  on  active
duty caused permanent  aggravation  of  his  condition  beyond  the  natural
course of the disease is not clear since  he  had  been  twice  hospitalized
previously and was previously  disabled  from  civilian  employment  in  the
years before the incidents during Reserve duty.

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A  complete  copy  of  the  Air  Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to   the
applicant’s counsel on 25 May 2005 for review and response within  30  days.
On 20 June 2005, the application  was  temporarily  withdrawn  at  counsel’s
request.

In a letter, dated 9 September 2005, the applicant’s counsel  requested  the
application be reopened and provided a statement from  the  applicant.   The
applicant  states,  in  part,   that   the   evaluation   contains   several
inaccuracies.  The BCMR Medical Consultant, aided by some  military  reports
that  include  misinformation,  mixes   up   various   medical/psychological
evaluations from a span of nearly  four  decades  and  seems  to  lump  them
together when it is convenient in an apparent attempt to suit  a  particular
interpretation.  He seems  to  have  pulled  together  bits  and  pieces  of
various reports to present  a  one-sided  profile.   Further,  although  the
evaluation insinuates that he was emotionally disabled  prior  to  the  1997
sexual assault, at least two Air Force physicians declared him fit for  duty
prior to the sexual assault.

Counsel’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit G.

_________________________________________________________________

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 error or injustice.  After a thorough review  of  the  evidence
of record and applicant’s submission,  we  are  not  persuaded  that  relief
should be granted.  Applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however,  we  do
not find these assertions, in and by themselves, sufficiently persuasive  to
override the rationale provided by the BCMR Medical Consultant.   Therefore,
we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the BCMR Medical  Consultant
and adopt his rationale as the basis for our conclusion that  the  applicant
has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  Based on  the  foregoing,
and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling  basis
to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

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 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  Docket  Number  BC-2004-02025
in Executive Session on 6 October 2005, under  the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                       Mr. Wayne R. Gracie, Panel Chair
                       Ms. Sue A. Lumpkins, Member
                       Mr. Terry L. Scott, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 25 Nov 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 19 May 05.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 May 05.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Counsel, dated 20 Jun 05.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 24 Jun 05.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, Counsel, dated 9 Sep 05, w/atchs.



                                   WAYNE R. GRACIE
                                   Panel Chair