Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03264
Original file (BC-2005-03264.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-03264
            INDEX CODE:  110.02
            COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  28 APRIL 2007

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to  show  that  he  received  a  service  connected
disability pension.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His nervous breakdown, high blood pressure, high adrenaline and  heart  rate
and worsening of his  chronic  schizophrenia  are  all  linked  to  the  job
stressors and burnout while in the Air Force.

Applicant submits no supporting  documentation.   The  applicant's  complete
submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force for a period of  four  years
on 26 May 1971 in the grade of airman  basic.   He  performed  duties  as  a
cook.  He received five Airman Performance Reports closing 1 February  1972,
31 July 1973, 8 March 1973, 9 October 1973 and 1  February  1974,  in  which
the overall ratings were 8, 8, 8, 2 and 1 respectively.

On  12  February  1974,  in  accordance  with  AFM  39-12,  paragraph  2-4a,
Inaptitude,  the  commander  initiated  discharge  proceedings  against  the
applicant.  The applicant was advised of his rights in this  matter.   After
consulting military legal counsel, the  applicant  submitted  statements  in
his behalf.  On 7 March 1974, the  discharge  authority  directed  that  the
applicant be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of  AFM  39-
12, Inaptitude, with service characterized as honorable.  The applicant  was
honorably discharged on 21 March 1974.  He had served 2 years, 9 months  and
26 days on active duty.

On  22  January  1974,  a  medical  separation  examination  was  conducted.
Statement by the applicant regarding his health at that time  was  described
as "excellent."

Documents provided by the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) indicate  the
DVA granted a non-service connected pension.

The  remaining  relevant  medical  facts  pertaining  to  this  application,
extracted from the applicant’s military medical records,  are  contained  in
the letter prepared by the BCMR Medical Consultant at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial.  The BCMR Medical  Consultant
states that a review of his service medical record does not  show  diagnosis
or treatment of any chronic mental  or  medical  condition  or  injury  that
warranted referral for evaluation in the  Air  Force  disability  evaluation
system leading to a disability discharge.  The  Medical  Consultant  advises
that the 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 EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was  forwarded  to  the  applicant  on  4
October 2006 for review and response within 30 days.  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 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 careful review  of  the  applicant’s
submission,  we  found  no  evidence   to   indicate   his   discharge   was
inappropriate or unjust.  Applicant contends  his  nervous  breakdown,  high
blood pressure, high adrenaline and chronic  schizophrenia  were  caused  by
his Air Force service.  However, we do not find this  argument  sufficiently
persuasive  to  override  the  rationale  expressed  by  the  BCMR   Medical
Consultant.  We believe it is interesting to note  that  the  Department  of
Veterans Affairs denied him service connected disability benefits for  these
conditions in 2005 because there was no evidence showing onset or  treatment
while on active duty, which in our estimation, provides  additional  support
for the Air Force assessment of his condition.  In view of the above and  in
the absence of evidence to the contrary,  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.  Therefore, we find no 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  Docket  Number  BC-2005-03264
in Executive Session on 7 November 2006, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

            Mr. James W. Russell III, Panel Chair
            Mr. Todd L. Schafer, Member
            Ms. Maureen B. Higgins, Member

The following documentary evidence  pertaining  to  Docket  Number  BC-2005-
03264 was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 19 Oct 05.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated
                28 Sep 06.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Oct 06.




                                   JAMES W. RUSSELL III
                                   Panel Chair



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02370

    Original file (BC-2005-02370.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-02370 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 31 November 2006 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her records be changed to show promotion to staff sergeant and a medical retirement. BCMR Medical Consultant's complete evaluation is at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2005-03544

    Original file (BC-2005-03544.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The remaining pertinent medical facts are contained in the evaluation prepared by the BCMR Medical Consultant at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR medical consultant states the evidence of record clearly show there were no medical conditions that warranted referral for disability evaluation while in the service including during the year leading up to his voluntary separation. We took notice of the applicant's complete...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802347

    Original file (9802347.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant further stated that the devil has been present and talked to him on numerous occasions inticing him to action. On 20 Jun 77, a report of evaluation by a psychiatrist indicated the applicant’s medical chart had been missing for the last two to three weeks according to the personnel record room though the psychiatrist was aware of having written at least two previous reports to applicant’s commander after various incidents in the squadron. The evaluation officer had two...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-00475

    Original file (BC-2005-00475.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant’s Report of Medical Examination, dated 29 September 1999, indicates at the time of the applicant’s enlistment, his blood pressure was normal. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommended denial indicating the applicant manifested two chronic medical conditions within six weeks of entry onto active duty while in basic training: pompholyx/eczema of the feet and essential hypertension (high blood...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05813

    Original file (BC 2013 05813.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The pattern of maladaptive behavior exhibited near the beginning of BMT is more consistent with the assigned mental health diagnosis of schizotal (schizotypal) personality disorder, not schizophrenia. The complete Medical evaluation is at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A representative from the state Office of Veterans Affairs states the applicant’s 100 percent service connected disability was recognized by the Air Force as a personality disorder (schizophrenia) and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03569

    Original file (BC-2007-03569.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends changing the reason for discharge to Secretarial Authority along with an upgrade of service characterization to honorable. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 March 2008. MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY Panel Chair AFBCMR BC-2007-03569 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2001-01184A

    Original file (BC-2001-01184A.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    ______________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends consideration for rating her neurocardiogenic syncope based on the severity of the condition at the time of her discharge. The service medical record finds no evidence of these symptoms while on active duty. In this regard, we note that the BCMR Medical Consultant believes that had her diagnosis of neorocardiogenic syncope been made definitively while on...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02481

    Original file (BC-2006-02481.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant was disability discharged with severance pay with a 20% disability rating (30% less 10% Existed Prior to Service (EPTS) factor) on April 7, 1983 for Bipolar Disorder. The orthomolecular psychiatrist in a letter dated November 5, 1980 supported the applicant’s entry into military service, with a caveat that he hadn’t seen the applicant in over two years. BY DIRECTION OF THE PANEL CHAIR RALPH J. PRETE Chief Examiner Air Force Board for Correction of Military...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2004-02791

    Original file (BC-2004-02791.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A medical evaluation, dated 17 September 1968, indicates the applicant was seen for headaches. A Veterans Administration Report of Medical Examination for Disability Evaluation, dated 4 December 1972, notes a history of the knee giving out many times - this began in 1970. The evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 2 September 2005, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03112

    Original file (BC-2002-03112.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He entered active duty in the Air Force on 24 Jul 73 for officer training and was discharged on 18 Oct 73 to accept a commission. Available records show that the applicant served 4 months and 16 days on active duty. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has...