ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00270
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
1. His discharge be upgraded from general (under honorable
conditions) to honorable.
2. His narrative reason for separation be changed from Pattern
of Misconduct to Secretarial Authority.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS
On 14 Dec 10, the applicant requested that his records be
corrected to change his discharge characterization to honorable
and his narrative reason to Secretarial Authority. After
considering all the facts and evidence in the case, the Board
denied his request on 4 Nov 10. For an accounting of the facts
and circumstances surrounding the applicants request, and the
rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of
Proceedings at Exhibit G.
By way of undated letter, the applicant requests reconsideration
and submits additional supporting documentation for
reconsideration. In support of his request, he provides a
personal statement, whichincludes five new pieces of evidence he
contends was not previously presented or taken into consideration
by the Board. First he was not provided a Medical Evaluation
Board assessment while on active duty. Additionally, the Board
did not consider the exhaustive process required to diagnose
bipolar disorder, his stress level at the time of his discharge
and his eventual diagnosis of bipolar disorder subsequent to his
discharge. Also to be considered is the time frame of his
discharge in relation to other problems faced by base mental
health clinics. Prior to 2004, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder
(PTSD) was not as well known or understood as it is currently,
nor were personnel screened for this disorder after returning
from war zones. Bipolar disorder is categorized along with
schizophrenia as a condition that is incompatible with military
service and results in a medical discharge. For a physician to
begin the line of inquiry necessary to successfully diagnose a
patient with bipolar disorder, he must do so with the knowledge
that his patient will be discharged from military service; the
physician will also take into account whether or not the patient
wishes to stay in uniform. The last piece of evidence not
considered by the Board is his answer to the physicians question
on whether or not he would prefer to remain in the military. It
is easy to understand how a physician dealing with military
members returning from Iraq and Afghanistan wants to go along
with the wishes of his patient and diagnose his problems as life
issues or work related stress instead of attempting to have an
individual discharged against his will for mental health reasons.
He was misdiagnosed while he served on active duty. Since the
DVA evaluated him with 50 percent service connected disability he
believes his request should be approved.
The applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit F.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
We have thoroughly reviewed the evidence of record and considered
the weight and relevance of the additional documentation provided
by the applicant, and whether or not it was discoverable at the
time of any previous application. We do not find the statements
submitted by the applicant meet the criteria for reconsideration
of his case. As the applicant has been previously advised,
reconsideration is provided only where newly discovered relevant
evidence if presented which was not available when the
application was submitted. Further, the reiteration of facts we
have previously addressed, uncorroborated personal observations,
or additional arguments on the evidence of record are not
adequate grounds for reopening a case. Therefore, in view of the
above and in the absence of new and relevant evidence, we find no
basis to reconsider the applicants request.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified the additional evidence presented did
not meet the criteria for reconsideration by the Board; and 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 AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2010-00270 in Executive Session on 13 Dec 12, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
XXX, Panel Chair
XXX, Member
XXX, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit G. Record of Proceedings,
dated 14 Dec 10, w/atchs.
Exhibit H. Applicant's Submission, undated.
XXX
Panel Chair
AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00880
VA psychiatric outpatient notes proximate to separation indicate the CI’s condition deteriorated significantly at that time, and he was diagnosed with PTSD in addition to bipolar disorder four days prior to separation. RECOMMENDATION : The Board recommends that the CI’s prior determination be modified as follows: TDRL at 50% for six months following CI’s prior medical separation (minimum of 50% IAW §4.129) and then a permanent 50% disability retirement as below. Absent the requirement for...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-1984-04083A
On 13 Oct 83, his commander recommended discharge. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant contends, as a diabetic herself, that her husband’s elevated blood sugar episode was not properly followed up by the Air Force. Review of service and DVA medical records through 1992 show no evidence of diabetes, and evaluation by DVA physicians also indicate no...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-1991-02293A
On 13 Oct 83, his commander recommended discharge. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant contends, as a diabetic herself, that her husband’s elevated blood sugar episode was not properly followed up by the Air Force. Review of service and DVA medical records through 1992 show no evidence of diabetes, and evaluation by DVA physicians also indicate no...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-00789
In the final assessment, the evaluating physician determined that “at this time, no condition [has been] identified that would preclude separation.” He concluded, “The patient with multiple issues as outlined above; all have been addressed and are stable at present.” The Medical Consultant notes the Military Disability Evaluation System (MDES), is chartered to maintain a fit and vital fighting force and offers disability compensation only for the medical condition(s) that (were) the cause...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03480
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant opines no change in the records is warranted. The complete BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC 2007 02405 2
The entry in his official medical records, dated 20 Sep 65, stating his headaches were relieved by proper eyeglasses in 1965 be changed to read Headaches from Dec 1961 to 1 Oct 65. For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicants original request and the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings (ROP) at Exhibit F. On 3 Jun 10, the Board notified the applicant that a subsequent, undated, request for reconsideration by the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03010-00
” He was found fully fit for duty, and clinic for psychological testing. patient’s medical record. According to the as was “likely” thought to be “chronic and evaluation were diagnoses of somatization fit for duty, and the No on 16 OCTOBER psychological d. SF 600, Chronological Record of Medical Care, from USS Enterprise, dated 05 APR 1982, was sea_” Per this report documented results of a psychological evaluation per the request of the ship evaluation of a “possible life at examination at...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02483
The applicant’s psychiatric condition was properly rated by the Physical Evaluation Board. AFPC/DPPD stated that Air Force disability boards can only rate unfitting medical conditions based on the individual’s medical status at the time of his or her evaluation; in essence, a snapshot of their condition at that time. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03205
The applicant was separated for unsuitability due to Adjustment Disorder and Personality Disorder. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In his response to the Air Force evaluations, the applicant discusses the events leading to his discharge and post-separation events that he believes are relevant to his case. He states that an accurate diagnosis could not have been made until...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130012594
Counsel requests reconsideration of the applicant's request for processing through the PDES. He saw combat stress and was diagnosed with Bipolar Disorder on 23 July 2008, but was not started on any medications despite being described as psychotic and manic/hypomanic. The fact that the applicant suffered from mental health issues is not in question; however, the evidence of record shows the applicant was receiving treatment and he consulted with counsel prior to requesting discharge.