RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-02990
            INDEX CODE:  100.03, 100.06,
                             108.01
            COUNSEL:

            HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  His records be corrected to show that he was medically retired on 9  May
1969 with a diagnosis of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), Chronic  Low
Back Pain, Diabetes, Type II, Hypertension, Renal Failure,  Coronary  Artery
Disease, Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease, and Anemia.

2.  In the alternative, his records  be  changed  to  reflect  that  he  was
discharged for medical reasons and his reenlistment  eligibility  (RE)  code
be corrected to a code reflecting a medical condition.

3.  His DD Form 214 be corrected to show he was awarded the Air  Force  Good
Conduct Medal, he completed basic  training,  specialty  career  development
courses, skill knowledge tests, and his rank  be  restored  to  the  highest
grade held with possible promotion to the grade of sergeant (E-4).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His   records   show   that    he    was    discharged    by    reason    of
unsuitability/unfitness.  His medical record indicates  as  early  as  March
1969 that he was having physical symptoms of Post Traumatic Stress  Disorder
(PTSD). His physical symptoms worsened  and  his  performance  at  work  was
affected. He  was  not  referred  to  psychiatric  counseling  nor  provided
rehabilitation. He  submits  as  evidence  a  Record  of  Proceedings  (ROP)
pertaining to a similar case that was approved by the Air  Force  Board  for
Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR).

In support of his request, applicant provided a personal statement,  a  copy
of ROP 02-02797, similar to his request, extracts from his medical  records;
a copy of his DD Form 214, Armed Forces  of  the  United  States  Report  of
Transfer or Discharge, DD Form 215, Correction to DD Form  214,  Release  or
Discharge  from  Active  Duty,  documents  associated  with  his   discharge
processing, and DVA rating decision.



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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant entered active duty on 7 Jun 67.  He was discharged on  9  May
69 under the provisions of Chapter 2, AFM 39-12 (Undesirable) after  serving
2 years, 10 months, and 14 days of active duty. On 16 August 1971,  the  Air
Force Discharge Review Board  (AFDRB)  upgraded  the  applicant's  discharge
characterization to honorable.  On 7  Jan  72,  the  AFBCMR  considered  and
denied his application requesting that he be compensated for his  record  of
severe  paranoid  personality  disorder  and   that   documentation   of   a
psychiatric severe personality disorder be removed from his records.   On  4
Feb 76, the Board considered and denied a  request  from  the  applicant  to
amend his DD Form 214 to include the discharge authority. On 7 Oct  76,  the
Board  considered  and  denied  the  applicant’s  request   for   disability
retirement in lieu of his honorable discharge.  On  20  Nov  78,  the  Board
considered and denied a similar request from the  applicant  for  disability
retirement. On 14 Mar 80, 20 Jun 88,  and  15  May  89,  the  applicant  was
denied reconsideration of his  request  for  disability  retirement.  On  21
August 2002, the Board considered and denied his request that  his  DD  Form
214 be amended to include the locations and dates of the  medals  he  earned
during his service.

The applicant received a referral performance report for the  period  of  12
June 1968 through 1 December 1968 with  a  nonrecommendation  for  promotion
from his rater and  additional  rater.  On  20  March  1969,  the  applicant
received a Court-Martial with a reduction to  the  rank  of  airman.  On  28
April 1969, the applicant received an Article 15 with  a  reduction  to  the
rank of airman basic.  The applicant's  Form  7,  Chronological  Listing  of
Service, indicates he was not eligible for award of the Good  Conduct  Medal
(AFGCM) for the period 7 June 1966 through 22 January 1969 and from 4  March
1969 to 28 March 1969.

On 25 April 2008, AFPC/DPSIT reviewed the applicant's records  and  verified
that  his  DD  Form  214  will  be  administratively  corrected  to  reflect
completion of Basic Military  Training,  6  wks,  July  1966  in  Block  25,
Education and Training Completed.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends granting the applicant's  alternative
request for relief of receiving a medical reason for discharge and a  change
in his reenlistment eligibility (RE) code to  reflect  a  discharge  for  an
unfitting medical condition. Had he been referred to  a  Medical  Evaluation
Board, and thereafter, to a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB),  the  applicant
would likely have been found unfit for military service and  separated  with
disability severance pay. Although the disability rating  options  available
to  the  PEB  would  have  included  permanent   or   temporary   retirement
eligibility, the BCMR Medical Consultant opines, based upon a  preponderance
of evidence, that the applicant  would  have  likely  been  assigned  a  10%
disability rating.

The BCMR Medical Consultant acknowledges the  applicant's  reported  history
of exposure to the uploading and shipping of wartime remains while  assigned
to Southeast Asia. The Medical Consultant is aware of  inconclusive  studies
that had attempted to link environmental factors  with  a  person's  genetic
predisposition for Schizophrenia. These include an early  childhood  trauma,
obstetrical  complications,  drug  abuse,  and  life  in  an  urban   living
environment compared to rural, among other factors. However, the  consultant
finds  no  direct  causal  relationship  between  the  applicant's   wartime
experiences and the development of the recommended  primary  basis  for  his
discharge - Schizophrenia. Therefore, the consultant finds  the  applicant's
Schizophrenia  was  neither  combat-related  or  the  direct  result  of  an
instrument of war.

Addressing the applicant's additional medical conditions, the  BCMR  Medical
Consultant acknowledges that the applicant has other  conditions  for  which
he  has  sought  service  connection;  however,  none  of  these   unfitting
conditions formed a contributory basis for his  discharge.  Therefore,  even
if service connection is established for one or more  of  these  conditions,
each condition would  remain  non-compensable  by  the  Military  Disability
Evaluation System (MDES). Unlike, the DVA, which operates under a  different
set of laws (Title 38, U.S.C), the MDES is chartered to maintain a  fit  and
vital force and can only,  by  law,  apply  disability  ratings  to  medical
condition(s) that cut short a service member's career; and then only by  the
degree of severity present at the final disposition.

The BCMR Medical Consultant acknowledges  that  the  full  manifestation  of
PTSD may be delayed, or  may  remain  dormant  for  months  and  even  years
following a given initial  traumatic  exposure;  only  to  acutely  manifest
later upon re-exposure to a given trigger or precipitating stressor. In  the
case  under  review,  even  though  PTSD  reportedly  was  not  an  existing
diagnostic choice available at the time of the  applicant's  discharge,  the
body of evidence available to his health care providers  at  the  time  does
not support such a clinical diagnosis. Additional consideration may be  made
for  the  possible  association,  or  interrelationship,  of  both   medical
disorders; one which has predominated, but has waxed  and  waned  over  time
and the other which has likely  evolved  in  a  delayed  fashion  over  time
(PTSD). It is important to note that the Department of Veterans Affairs  has
adopted this combined diagnostic approach on a document, dated 25 May  2007,
wherein a disability rating of 70 percent has been awarded to the  applicant
for Schizophrenia, paranoid type, with PTSD, under the  singular  diagnostic
code, 9203.

Finally, the BCMR Medical Consultant notes that affixing a specific  medical
diagnosis to the applicant's DD  Form  214  could  perpetuate  the  negative
stigma reportedly affecting his social and occupational opportunities.

The remaining pertinent facts are contained in the  evaluation  prepared  by
the BCMR Medical Consultant at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________
AFPC/DPSOE recommends the applicant's request  be  time  barred.  Promotions
during the time frame the applicant is requesting were  made  at  the  Major
Command, unless delegated by the  Major  Command  to  the  Wing,  Group,  or
Squadron levels. HQ USAF distributed promotion quotas to the Major  Commands
based on projected vacancies within  each  Career  Field  Subdivision.  Some
career fields received more promotions than others based  on  vacancies  and
the needs of the Air Force. To  be  considered  for  promotion  to  E-4,  an
individual must have had 8 months time-in-grade, 40 months  time-in-service,
and be recommended  by  the  commander.  At  the  time  of  the  applicant's
discharge on 9 May 1969, he had only 35 months and 2 days time-in-service.

AFPC/DPSOE's complete evaluation is in Exhibit D.

AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial and states the applicant did  not  have  three
years of creditable service for the AFGCM.

AFPC/DPSIDR's complete evaluation is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant indicates in his response that there  is  an  unaccounted  for
gap in his  records  from  October  1967  to  22 December  1967.   Applicant
contends he completed survival school enroute to Hawaii, Guam,  Vietnam  and
Thailand.

In regards to his promotion to sergeant, he states that he met the 8  months
time in grade for promotion to sergeant and would have  met  the  40  months
time in service had he not been injured.

The applicant reviewed the DPSOE evaluation  and  states  that  his  request
should not be time  barred.  He  has  submitted  numerous  applications  for
relief and it has not been as if he has waited for 38 years to petition  the
Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records.

In his review of DPSIDR's evaluation, the applicant states  he  believes  he
has met the one year period of service during the war to be entitled to  the
AFGCM.

Lastly, the applicant states that because he was not referred to a  Physical
Evaluation Board, he was denied a separation and  discharge  evaluation  for
his chronic low back pain  which  has  caused  the  Department  of  Veterans
Affairs to reach an erroneous  conclusion  of  law  that  his  chronic  back
disability is not service connected.

Applicant'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, the Board finds no evidence of an error in this case and  we  remain
unpersuaded that he has been the victim of an injustice.   The  Board  notes
that  the  applicant  has  filed  numerous  applications  over   the   years
addressing virtually the same issues contained in his  current  application;
however, the Board carefully  considered  the  new  documentation  submitted
with his appeal, to include the previous evidence,  and  does  not  find  it
sufficient to warrant approval of the requested relief. We  also  note  that
the applicant cited a case of another individual that applicant believes  is
similar to his, and whose application was granted. However,  the  burden  of
providing a  showing  of  error  or  injustice  rests  with  the  applicant.
Furthermore, we note that the BCMR Medical  Consultant’s  recommendation  to
grant the alternative relief requested was predicated on whether or not  the
applicant had met an MEB and subsequent PEB – which  he  did  not.  In  this
regard, we note that had the applicant  completed  the  MEB  processing,  he
would have faced a dual-action consideration through the  Secretary  of  the
Air Force Personnel  Council  who  would  have  deliberated  on  whether  to
separate him  administratively,  as  happened,  vice  a  medical  disability
separation, had he  been  found  unfit  in  the  course  of  the  disability
processing. After summarizing the facts of the case, we note that  there  is
no evidence that the applicant suffered from  a  psychiatric  disorder  that
should have been considered in the disability evaluation system at the  time
of his administrative separation in 1969.  While some  traits  of  impending
irrational behavior were noted, it was not until  sometime  later  that  his
schizophrenia became manifest.  Therefore, in the  absence  of  evidence  to
the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting  the  relief
requested regarding his medical issues.  With  respect  to  the  applicant's
contention that he is entitled to the AFGCM we note in his  case,  that  the
one year of service he cites as an alternative to the usual three  years  of
creditable service, requires that  he  provide  evidence  to  show  that  he
served in-country in Vietnam.

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-2007-02990
in Executive Session on 25 September 2008, under the provisions of  AFI  36-
2603:

      Mr. Michael J. Novel, Panel Chair
      Mr. Elwood C. Lewis, III, Member
      Mr. Garry G. Sauner, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 Sep 07, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 8 Apr 08.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 29 Apr 08.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIDR, dated 14 May 08.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Sep 08, w/atch.
    Exhibit G.  Applicant's Response, dated 7 Jun 08, w/atchs.




                                 MICHAEL J. NOVEL
                                 Panel Chair


                       AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION
                             OF MILITARY RECORDS

                   CASE TRANSMITTAL / COORDINATION RECORD


IN THE MATTER OF DOCKET NO:

XXXXXXXXXXXX,    BC-2007-02990

TMCD: 19 OCTOBER 2008

ROUTE IN TURN    INITIALS  DATE

1.  CHIEF EXAMINER     ________  ________
    (Coord/Signature)

3.  EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ________  ________
    (Coordination)

4.  Mr. Michael J. Novel     ________  ________
    PANEL CHAIR
    (Signature on Proceedings)

5.  AFBCMR (Processing)





                                   DANIEL C. MILLER
                                   EXAMINER
                                   AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION
                                   OF MILITARY RECORDS
AFBCMR
1535 Command Drive
EE Wing, 3rd Floor
Andrews AFB MD 20762-7002


Dear

      Reference your application submitted under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603 (Section 1552, 10 USC), AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2007-02990.

      After careful consideration of your application and military records,
the Board determined that the evidence you presented did not demonstrate
the existence of material error or injustice.  Accordingly, the Board
denied your application.

      You have the right to submit newly discovered relevant evidence for
consideration by the Board.  In the absence of such additional evidence, a
further review of your application is not possible.

      BY DIRECTION OF THE CHAIRMAN





                                                              WILLIAM C.
WHITE
                                                              Chief
Examiner
                                                              Air Force
Board for Correction
                                                              of Military
Records

Attachment:
Record of Board Proceedings