Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01069
Original file (BC-2010-01069.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01069 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: YES 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

He be reconsidered by a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) and 
recommended to be permanently retired. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He does not believe that all pertinent information was considered 
prior to his separation from the Air Force. He was diagnosed 
with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) in 2006. Although he 
was being treated for PTSD he was sent on deployment in 2007. 
Events that occurred while on deployment further intensified the 
PTSD symptoms. As he attempted to deal with PTSD, adjust to his 
medications, and deal with his personal issues, his duty 
performance declined. Because he suffered severely with PTSD, he 
believes he should have been evaluated by a Medical Evaluation 
Board and medically retired. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides a personal 
statement and documents extracted from his military personnel 
records. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 7 June 2000. 

 

The applicant requested separation from the Air Force for 
miscellaneous reasons effective 1 January 2009. 

 

The applicant was honorably discharged on 17 January 2009 under 
the provisions of AFI 36-3208, Miscellaneous/General Reasons. 
She served 8 years, 7 months and 11 days on active duty. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 


 

The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial. The Medical 
Consultant states evidence shows the applicant was released from 
military service not due to PTSD, but in response to his special 
request for an early separation for miscellaneous reasons. 
Although the applicant has reportedly participated in at least 
two deployments while carrying the diagnosis of PTSD, the last of 
which was reportedly followed by a worsening of symptoms, no 
evidence is provided to reflect an impairment of duty or 
sustained duty restrictions that would have or should have been 
the cause for career termination. 

 

The Medical Consultant’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

On 19 November 2010, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was 
forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit D). 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 an error or injustice. We took 
notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the 
merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and the 
recommendation of the AFBCMR Medical Consultant and adopt his 
rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has 
failed to sustain his burden of proof of the existence of an 
error or injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the 
contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief 
sought in this application. 

 

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 the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice; the 
application was denied without a personal appearance; 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-2010-01069 in Executive Session on 6 December 2010, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 

 

 

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2010-01069 was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 28 December 2009, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, 

 dated 27 October 2010. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 19 November 2010. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02847

    Original file (BC-2011-02847.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02847 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. Addressing the applicant’s character of service, as depicted on both her DD Form 214 and NGB Form 22, the Medical Consultant notes this has been entered as “entry level.” The Medical Consultant opines the appropriate designation would be...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02638

    Original file (BC-2011-02638.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant entered the Air Force on 10 Jun 98 and served on active duty until her Honorable Discharge on 9 Oct 06. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The AFBCMR Medical...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00707

    Original file (BC 2014 00707.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00707 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His separation be changed to a medical retirement. A complete copy of the Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 27 October 2014 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). A complete...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00608

    Original file (BC 2014 00608.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    A complete copy of the AFPC/DPFC evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant’s counsel argues that evidence material to the claim was not considered, the relevant standards for providing ADLs loss were misapplied, and the applicant’s underlying traumatic injury was questioned although he received an initial payment of $25,000. The preponderance of the evidence in the applicant’s case proves he sustained at least 90 day ADL loss due to his traumatic...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-00753

    Original file (BC-2009-00753.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 18 April 1994, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intent to discharge him from the Air Force for a “Pattern of Misconduct,” under the authority of Air Force regulation 39-10, paragraph 5-47b, with either an honorable or general characterization of service. 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 office of primary responsibility and the BCMR Medical...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00226

    Original file (BC-2010-00226.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The specific reason is that on 24 January 1994, the applicant was diagnosed with adjustment and personality disorders which were not compatible with her military duties. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that she was discharged on 14 February 1994 with a narrative reason for separation of "Adjustment Disorder" rather than...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01757

    Original file (BC-2006-01757.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The IPEB reviewed his case and found the member fit and recommended, "Return to Duty." BCMR Medical Consultant's complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluations and stated he sought a second opinion by pulmonologist in December 2005 and was diagnosed with asthma after having below normal pulmonary function tests. In this respect, the Board notes...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2006-01757

    Original file (BC-2006-01757.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The IPEB reviewed his case and found the member fit and recommended, "Return to Duty." BCMR Medical Consultant's complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluations and stated he sought a second opinion by pulmonologist in December 2005 and was diagnosed with asthma after having below normal pulmonary function tests. In this respect, the Board notes...

  • 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC 2009 00052

    Original file (BC 2009 00052.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The AFBCMR Medical Consultant states even though PTSD may not have been an available diagnosis at the time of the applicant's military service, a mental health professional would have/should have been able to extract and list any signs and symptoms believed to be the result of an identifiable trauma, and to include these in the narrative summary if they were present at the time of evaluation. The AFBCMR Medical Consultant's complete evaluation is at Exhibit...