RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00615
            INDEX CODE:  110.00
            COUNSEL: VETERANS SERVICE OFFICE
            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  She be awarded the Air Force Commendation  Medal  (AFCM)  or  any  other
additional awards she may be entitled to.

2.  Her honorable discharge be changed to a medical discharge.

______________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

All the disabilities listed on her medical assessment form added up to  more
than 30 percent.  Her Physical Evaluation Board was pending one month  later
than her discharge date.  She was advised it would be easier for her  to  be
discharged.  She took the advice and accepted the discharge  without  having
a board.

An award package for the AFCM was submitted while she was  assigned  to  the
60 MSS, Travis AFB.  The package was lost  and  she  spoke  with  the  first
sergeant and asked him to resubmit the  package.   She  was  discharged  and
never received the award.

In support of her application, applicant provided a personal statement,  and
documentation extracted from her medical records.

Her complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

______________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 21 Nov 95,  the  applicant  contracted  her  initial  enlistment  in  the
Regular Air Force.  She was progressively promoted to  the  grade  of  staff
sergeant having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank  of  10
Oct 01.

On 25 Mar 02, the applicant was evaluated at  the  Life  Skills  Center  for
depression.  She  was  tentatively  diagnosed  with  Post  Traumatic  Stress
Disorder (PTSD).  PTSD was confirmed on 11 Apr 03.  On 3  Aug  03,  she  was
honorably discharged.  She had served  7 years,  8 months  and  13  days  on
active duty.

______________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPPR recommends the applicant’s request for award of  the  AFCM  be
denied.  DPPPR states they were unable to locate an award or  recommendation
for award of the AFCM.  In order to verify the  applicant’s  entitlement  to
the AFCM, she must submit a recommendation from  someone  in  her  chain  of
command and a proposed citation.

The applicant may pursue award for the AFCM  under  the  provisions  of  the
1996 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).  Under the  1996  NDAA,  the
service member may be  recommended  for  a  decoration  by  following  these
procedures: 1) be made by someone, other than the  service  member  himself,
in the service member’s chain of command at that the time of  the  incident,
and, who has first hand knowledge of the acts or  achievements;  and  2)  be
submitted through a congressional member who can ask a military  service  to
review a proposal for a decoration.

The complete AFPC/DPPPR evaluation is at Exhibit C.

The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends the applicant’s records be  changed
to reflect she received a  medical  retirement  with  a  30  or  50  percent
disability rating.  The Medical Consultant states she was  displaying  signs
of PTSD.  It is uncertain how disabling her mental  health  conditions  were
at  the  time  of  discharge.   Usually  psychiatric  reports   include   an
assessment of the social and  industrial  imparity  for  both  military  and
civilian life, but these were not included in her  medical  records,  either
during or post-service.  The mental health providers  included  a  different
assessment tool, the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF),  which  is  not
as amenable in determining disability ratings.  This is a rating scale  from
1-100 to assess the  social,  occupational  and  psychological  function  of
adults.  The GAF reports in her medical records at  the  time  of  discharge
were mostly rated between mid 50’s to low 60’s.  A GAF  between  61  and  70
indicates some mild symptoms or some difficulty in social,  occupational  or
school functioning, but generally functioning pretty well.  GAFs between  51
and 60 are characteristics of moderate symptoms or  moderate  difficulty  in
social, occupational or school functioning.  The more severe  cases  are  in
the 41 to 50 range.  The GAFs between 31 and  40  show  some  impairment  in
reality testing or communication or major impairment in several areas.

If a service member is determined to have an unfitting condition a MEB  must
be initiated and completed within 30 days.  The only way  a  service  member
can opt out of an MEB would be if the service member’s  date  of  separation
was quickly approaching and the MEB could not  be  completed  prior  to  the
service member’s established date of separation.  The service  member  would
be kept on active duty for disability  processing.   However,  the  enlisted
member can reject a request for a medical  hold  and  could  be  allowed  to
separate on their established DOS.  In that case a  medical  hold  would  be
the appropriate action to  keep  the  service  member  on  active  duty  for
disability processing.  She was determined to have  an  unfitting  condition
as early as April 2003 and there was ample time for an MEB.

The AFBCMR Medical Consultant’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit D.

AFPC/DPSD recommends the  requested  relief  be  denied.   DPSD  states  the
medical conditions she listed did not warrant an  MEB  or  referral  in  the
disability evaluation system.

The complete AFPC/DPSD complete evaluation is at Exhibit F.

______________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed the Air Force  evaluations  and  states  she  concurs
with the evaluation from the AFBCMR Medical Consultant and did  not  respond
at first because she expected  her  case  would  have  a  positive  outcome.
However, then she received the DPSD advisory which recommended  denial  with
very little explanation.  She believes the DPSD evaluation  cannot  hold  up
to the medical consultant’s evaluation because he is a medical  professional
and officer and the DPSD person is not.

Applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit H.

______________________________________________________________

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

An additional AFBCMR Medical Consultant evaluation was requested to  address
the disparity in the recommended disability rating.  The Medical  Consultant
notes that in  none  of  her  clinical  encounters  was  there  a  need  for
inpatient care or treatment, which would support a rating of 50 percent  and
recommends she be permanently retired with a 30 percent disability rating.

The AFBCMR Medical Consultant’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit I.

______________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy  of  the  additional  Air  Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant on 30 Apr 08, for review and response within 30 days.  As of  this
date, no response has been received by this office.

______________________________________________________________
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 an error or an injustice regarding her  request  for  award  of
the AFCM.  We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in  judging
the  merits  of  the  case;  however,  we  agree  with   the   opinion   and
recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility  and  adopt
its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has  failed
to sustain her burden of proof that she has suffered either an error  or  an
injustice.  Therefore, in view of  the  foregoing,  we  find  no  compelling
basis to recommend granting this portion of her request.

4.    Sufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence  of  an  injustice  regarding  her  request   for   a   disability
separation.  In this regard, the  AFBCMR  Medical  Consultant  has  provided
evaluations which indicate that the applicant's medical conditions were  not
properly adjudicated or given full  and  fair  consideration  prior  to  her
separation from active duty.  The Medical Consultant believes, based on  her
Global Assessment Functioning and a description of her  activities,  that  a
disability retirement with a compensable rating of  30  percent  would  have
occurred had  the  appropriate  actions  been  taken.   We  agree  with  the
assessments and recommend her records be corrected to the  extent  indicated
below.

______________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force  relating
to APPLICANT be corrected to show that:

            a.  On 2 August 2003, she was found unfit to perform the  duties
of her office, rank, grade, or rating  by  reason  of  physical  disability,
incurred while she was entitled to receive basic pay; that the diagnosis  in
her case was Post Traumatic Stress  Disorder  and  Major  Depression,  VASRD
code 9411, rated at 30%; that the degree of impairment was  permanent;  that
the disability was not due to intentional  misconduct  or  willful  neglect;
that the disability  was  not  incurred  during  a  period  of  unauthorized
absence; and that the disability was not received in the line of duty  as  a
direct result of armed conflict or caused by an instrumentality of war.

            b.  On 3 August 2003, she was  retired  by  reason  of  physical
disability under the provisions of AFI 36-3212.

            c.  On 3 August 2003, she  elected  spouse  and  child  coverage
under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) based on full retired pay.

______________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number  BC-2007-
00615 in Executive Session on 11 Jun 08 under  the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                       Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
                       Ms. Steven A. Cantrell, Member
                       Mr. Michael J. Novel, Member

All members voted to correct the  records  as  recommended.   The  following
documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket  Number  BC-2007-00615  was
considered:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 21 Feb 07, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 19 Apr 07.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, dated 19 Oct
07.
      Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 Oct 07.
      Exhibit F.  Letter, AFPC/DPSD, dated 10 Jan 08.
      Exhibit G.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Jan 08.
      Exhibit H.  Letter, Applicant, dated 31 Jan 08.
      Exhibit I.  Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, dated 25 Apr
08.
      Exhibit J.  Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 30 Apr 08.




                             CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
                             Panel Chair










AFBCMR BC-2007-00615


MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

      Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force
Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section
1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116) it is directed that:

      The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to       be corrected to show that:

            a.  On 2 August 2003, she was found unfit to perform the duties
of her office, rank, grade, or rating by reason of physical disability,
incurred while she was entitled to receive basic pay; that the diagnosis in
her case was Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and Major Depression, VASRD
code 9411, rated at 30%; that the degree of impairment was permanent; that
the disability was not due to intentional misconduct or willful neglect;
that the disability was not incurred during a period of unauthorized
absence; and that the disability was not received in the line of duty as a
direct result of armed conflict or caused by an instrumentality of war.

            b.  On 3 August 2003, she was retired by reason of physical
disability under the provisions of AFI 36-3212.

            c.  On 3 August 2003, she elected spouse and child coverage
under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) based on full retired pay




                             JOE G. LINEBERGER
                             Director
                             Air Force Review Boards Agency