Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03128
Original file (BC-2005-03128.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-03128
                                       INDEX CODE:  108.00
      XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX               COUNSEL:  NONE

      XXXXXXXXXX                        HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  16 April 2007

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be given a new Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) rating.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

There are inaccuracies in the initiation,  application,  and  processing  of
actions associated with his medical condition.  The  administrative  actions
resulting  from  the  final  determination  in  his  Fitness  for  Continued
Military Duty (FFD) process should be terminated and  an  informal  Line  of
Duty (LOD) investigation should  be  initiated  for  injuries  he  sustained
while in a military duty status on 8 April  2004.   The  administrative  LOD
action taken by the Air Force  Reserve  Command  Surgeon  General  (AFRC/SG)
staff on 23 June 2005 for  his  injuries  was  inaccurate  and  contradicted
guidance in current Air Force Instructions on  processing  LODs  on  Reserve
personnel.  In addition, actions taken in his  FFD  case  resulting  in  the
current   pending   administrative   actions,   was   based   on   incorrect
administrative action by the AFRC/SG staff.

In support of his application, the applicant provides a personal  statement;
and copies  of  training  orders,  personnel  brief,  medical  records,  and
numerous memorandums/letters/e-mails  concerning  his  FFD  evaluation,  PEB
findings,  and  his  administrative  discharge.   The  applicant’s  complete
submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant’s available records indicate he retired  from  the  Air  Force
Reserve effective 19 September 2005 in the grade of technical sergeant  with
32 years, 11 months, and 28 days of satisfactory service.

The applicant was on orders 5-16 April  2005  at  Dobbins  Air  Force  Base,
Georgia, in support of an Operational Readiness Inspection Exercise.   On  8
April 2004, he reported to the flight medicine clinic for a  bruise  to  the
head, stating he had bumped his head against a wall.  The  attending  doctor
noted in his medical record  that  the  head  trauma  was  sustained  in  an
activity not related to the drill.  The applicant presented  to  the  clinic
again on 18 April 2004, two days after his orders  ended,  for  anxiety  and
panic attacks.  On 22 April 2004, he was placed on  a  physical  profile  of
“P4” pending further medical evaluation An LOD was accomplished due  to  the
applicant’s mental health diagnosis and the  medication  he  was  taking  to
determine his fitness for duty.

On 13 May 2004, the applicant was  notified  that  he  was  restricted  from
further participation for pay  or  points  until  a  PEB  determination  was
processed and determination was made on his  military  status.   On  7  June
2004, the  Air  Force  Reserve  Board  determined  the  applicant  medically
disqualified for worldwide duty and continued military service  due  to  his
diagnosis of depression treated with psychotropic medication since 29  March
2004.  On 9 June 2004, the applicant requested his case be  referred  to  an
Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) for fitness evaluation.

On 26 April 2005, the IPEB found the applicant unfit for continued  military
service with the diagnosis of Major  Depressive  Disorder,  Single  Episode,
Partial Remission, associated with Anxiety and Panic Disorders.  On  28  May
2005, the applicant concurred with the IPEB findings and chose to waive  his
case for referral to a Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB)  for  fitness
determination.  In addition,  he  acknowledged  that  discharge  proceedings
would be initiated against  him  unless  he  chose  retirement  in  lieu  of
discharge.

As stated above, the applicant’s available records indicate he retired  from
the Air Force Reserve effective 19 September 2005 in the grade of  technical
sergeant with 32 years, 11 months, and 28 days of satisfactory service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFRC/DPZ recommends denial of the applicant’s request for a new PEB  rating.
 DPZ states the administrative  LOD  paperwork,  filed  in  the  applicant’s
military medical records, documents his head injuries on 8  April  2004  and
indicates he inflicted the injuries upon himself.  The attending doctor  did
not annotate the injuries were not in  the  line  of  duty;  therefore,  the
injuries would be considered in the line of duty.  The  FFD  case  initiated
on the applicant was not based on the head injuries, but was  based  on  the
diagnosis  of  “depression  treated  with  psychotropic  medications.”   The
diagnosis was an  incidental  diagnosis  uncovered  during  the  applicant’s
treatment for head injuries.   It  was  also  documented  that  he  has  had
syptoms of depression since September 2003.

It is the opinion of DPZ that the applicant has not  provided  any  data  or
information that would warrant a change to his  records.   However,  if  the
decision is to  grant  the  relief  sought,  the  records  should  show  the
findings of the PEB to be invalid and that the applicant  is  qualified  for
continued military service.

The DPZ evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPD recommends denial of the applicant’s  request.   DPPD  states  the
preponderance of evidence reflects the Physical  Disability  Division  never
received a referral to the PEB; therefore, they could  not  have  given  the
applicant a medical discharge.

The DPPD evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluation were forwarded to the applicant  on  20
January 2006 for review and response within 30 days (Exhibit  E).   As  of
this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided  by  existing  law  or
regulations.

2.  The application was timely.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of an error or injustice.   We  took  notice  of  the  applicant's
complete submission in judging the merits of the case and do not  find  that
it supports  a  determination  that  the  Reserves  finding  him  unfit  for
continued military service was in error or unjust.  Applicant’s  contentions
are duly noted; however, we find no evidence to indicate the  applicant  was
treated  differently  than  any  other  individuals  in   similar   situated
circumstances.  In view of this finding, we  agree  with  the  opinions  and
recommendation of the  Air  Force  advisory  opinions  and  we  adopt  their
rationale as a basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been  the
victim of either an error or an injustice.  In the absence  of  evidence  to
the contrary, we 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 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 18 May 2006, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Gregory A. Parker, Member
                 Ms. LeLoy W. Cottrell, Member


The following documentary evidence for AFBCMR Docket Number
BC-2005-03128 was considered:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 7 Oct 05, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, AFRC/DPZ, dated 5 Jan 06.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 12 Jan 06, w/atchs.
      Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 Jan 06.




                                  MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
                                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-00883

    Original file (BC-2005-00883.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s complete submission, w/attachments, is at Exhibit A. Based on documentation provided by the applicant he did retire from the Air Force Reserve in part due to having a condition that made him physically disqualified for active duty. Applicant appealed the unfit decision to the Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB) on 1 Apr 04.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 02357

    Original file (BC 2012 02357.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Based on the available records, the applicant served on active duty, from 13 Oct 82 to 29 Oct 92 and was transferred to the Air Force Reserve. They must have eight years of active service and have been on active duty orders for more than 30 days at the time the condition became unfitting, as subsequently determined by the PEB, and meet all other requirements set forth under the law and governing Air Force...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-02702

    Original file (BC-2006-02702.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was told 12731b pertained only to those reservists who had served more than 15 but less than 20 years and had experienced an injury considered not in the line of duty were eligible for retirement. He would pay the severance back if he could retire. A1B’s complete evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant believes he earned retirement benefits by serving for...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03709

    Original file (BC-2011-03709.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    There was no disabling or disqualifying issue; therefore no requirement for a Medical Evaluation Board existed. AFI 36-3212 allows for a reserve member to be retained in the reserves and returned to duty even though he may have a medical condition that requires some restrictions. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered BCMR Docket Number BC-2011-03709 in Executive Session on 28 June 2012 and on 11 July 2012, under the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00470

    Original file (BC 2014 00470.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    His spine injury be determined to be “in-the-line-of-duty” (ILOD). On 24 Jul 10, the applicant appealed the Informal LOD Determination of “existed prior to service—Service Aggravated” for his cervical spine, asking that the injury be re-investigated. Regarding the applicant’s contention the IPEB failed to appreciate the severity of his spinal condition, according to AFI 36-3212, Physical Evaluation For Retention, Retirement, And Separation, when reviewing cases, the IPEB considers medical...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02769

    Original file (BC-2010-02769.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    In support of his request, the applicant provides a statement from counsel and copies of excerpts of his military personnel records and civilian and service medical records pertaining to his LOD Determination, Medical Evaluation Board (MEB), Physical Evaluation Board (PEB), and subsequent permanent retirement for physical disability. The applicant contends that his 2004 LOD injury rendered him unfit to perform his duties and, thus, he should have been retained on active duty until he was...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 05881

    Original file (BC 2012 05881.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The 2003 surgery and disc herniation was not “in the line of duty,” so she is predisposed for back pain/disc herniation from a pre-existing non-military back injury.” On 28 Aug 07, an Informal LOD determination concluded the applicant’s major depressive disorder related to her back pain was “in the line of duty.” On 29 Aug 07, the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) awarded the applicant a 100 percent combined disability rating, based upon the loss of use of both lower extremities. The...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05881

    Original file (BC 2012 05881.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The 2003 surgery and disc herniation was not “in the line of duty,” so she is predisposed for back pain/disc herniation from a pre-existing non-military back injury.” On 28 Aug 07, an Informal LOD determination concluded the applicant’s major depressive disorder related to her back pain was “in the line of duty.” On 29 Aug 07, the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) awarded the applicant a 100 percent combined disability rating, based upon the loss of use of both lower extremities. The...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00698

    Original file (BC-2004-00698.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    If he is medically unfit to serve, due to an LOD injury, he should be retired medically from the time of injury. He enlisted into the Air Force Reserves on 23 May 2000 for a period of 6 years. He had to file against his employer to prove that the absences were due to injury and beyond his control.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01911

    Original file (BC 2014 01911.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Physical Disability Board of Review (PDBR) Special Review Panel (SRP) recommends that there be no change of the applicant’s disability and separation determination as it relates to his diagnosed PTSD. This is the reason why an individual can be found unfit for military service for one or more medical conditions, under Title 10, and yet sometime thereafter receive compensation ratings from the DVA for additional medical conditions that were service-connected, but not...