RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04514 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) be rated by the 
Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) so his combined rating 
would increase and entitle him to a permanent disability 
retirement. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He was not rated for his PTSD due to an administrative oversight. 

 

He was clearly misrepresented at his Medical Evaluation Board 
(MEB) and Physical Evaluation Board (PEB), and in turn was not 
given an accurate PEB disability rating upon discharge. 

 

His diagnosis of PTSD was not included in the letter written by 
his doctor for the MEB. His doctor was remiss in not addressing 
the PTSD that one of her professional colleagues at Parkview 
Medical Center addressed and describes. She noted his diagnosis 
was not substantiated in the admission/discharge write-ups. 
However, the medical documentation from Parkview Medical Center 
describes his diagnosis of PTSD. Nevertheless, upon the 
discharge from Parkview and his Veterans Administration (VA) 
evaluation, he was certainly rated for PTSD and it was tied to 
his combat tour in Iraq. 

 

In a four-page letter, the applicant depicts his life from the 
start, as the son of a dedicated soldier, to the present time, a 
former airmen who fought for his country and now struggles to 
cope with the reoccurring images of violence and death, after 
war. 

 

According to federal law, the military is required to give anyone 
whose PTSD is severe enough to warrant discharge, a rating of at 
least 50 percent--a level that qualifies them for lifetime 
medical treatment for the veteran and his family, as well as 
monthly tax-free retirement payments if the rating is combat-
related. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides a personal 
statement, a letter from his former First Sergeant, and copies of 


his service medical records and Department of Veterans Affairs 
(DVA) rating decision. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 12 Sep 08, the applicant underwent a MEB for 
anxiety/personality disorder. The MEB Medical Summary, dated 
2 Sep 08 and prepared by a USAF psychiatrist, outlines the 
applicant’s medical condition and states, during this examination 
the member specifically denied having experienced any symptoms 
which would have been consistent with the diagnosis of PTSD at 
that time. His diagnosis on that occasion was “Axis I: Anxiety 
Disorder, Not Otherwise Specified (NOS) and Axis II: Personality 
Disorder NOS.” 

 

On 24 Nov 08, his case was referred to the Informal Physical 
Evaluation Board (IPEB). The IPEB reviewed his case and found 
the applicant unfit for continued military and recommended 
discharge with severance pay with a disability rating of 
10 percent for a diagnosis of Anxiety Disorder, NOS. The IPEB 
noted “Per Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 1332.38, Physical Disability Evaluation, paragraph E5.1.3.9.1, a 
Personality Disorder is unsuiting rather than unfitting for 
military service, and therefore not subject to disability 
law/policy.” 

 

On 16 Dec 08, the applicant agreed with the IPEB’s findings and 
recommended disposition, and officials within the Office of the 
Secretary of the Air Force directed his discharge on 30 Jan 09. 

 

He served 7 years, 4 months, and 12 days of active military 
service. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSD recommends denial. DPSD states the preponderance of 
evidence reflects that no error or injustice occurred during the 
disability process and at the time of separation. 

 

DPSD states the applicant’s MEB was for anxiety/personality 
disorder; not for PTSD. PTSD is a subtype of anxiety disorder 
that was considered but rejected as a possible more specific 
diagnosis at the time. It was noted in the narrative summary 
that the applicant denied specific PTSD symptoms of re-
experiencing, avoidance or hyper-arousal and noted: “SSgt S. was 
discharged 18 Aug 08 from Parkview Medical Center with a 


diagnosis of Mood Disorder NOS and PTSD although the PTSD 
diagnosis was not substantiated in the admission of discharge 
write-ups.” The IPEB did not feel the narrative summary writer 
found sufficient medical evidence to diagnose PTSD, but did 
diagnose the more general anxiety disorder, which was found 
unfitting. If the applicant had disagreed with the FPEB’s 
recommendation, he could have submitted a rebuttal to have his 
PTSD considered and rated. His case would have been forwarded to 
the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council for their review 
and finalization. This appeal process, when followed, assures 
members receive the benefit of a full and fair hearing in 
accordance with disability policy. 

 

The Department of Defense (DoD) and the DVA operate under 
separate laws. Under Title 10, United States Code (USC), 
Physical Evaluation Boards must determine if a member’s condition 
renders them unfit for continued military service relating to 
their office, grade, rank or rating. The fact a person may have 
a medical condition does not mean the condition is unfitting for 
continued military service. To be unfitting, the condition must 
be such that it alone precludes the member from fulfilling their 
military duties. If the board renders a finding of unfit, the 
law provides appropriate compensation due to the premature 
termination of their career. The USAF disability boards must 
rate disabilities based on the member’s condition at the time of 
evaluation; in essence a snapshot of their condition at that 
time. It is the charge of the DVA to pick up where the Air Force 
must, by law, leave off. Under Title 38, the DVA may rate any 
service-connected condition based upon future employability or 
reevaluate based on changes in the severity of a condition. This 
often results in different ratings by the two agencies. 

 

The complete DPSD evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

He does not understand how his PTSD diagnosis would be blatantly 
ignored when two separate professional mental health providers 
diagnosed him with this condition prior to his IPEB. 

 

He submitted copies of the discharge summaries from Cedar Springs 
Behavioral Health Center and Parkview Medical Center, which are 
clearly being disregarded. He is one of thousands of veterans 
who have fallen victim to the military’s broken rating process 
and the downplaying of PTSD as “anxiety/personality disorder” to 
minimize the cost of compensation. How can the Military Health 
Care System trust civilian medical professional organizations to 
care for their airman yet discount their diagnosis when rating 
and discharging them? 

 


He acknowledges the statement “he was given the opportunity to 
submit a rebuttal to the FPEB’s decision.” However, it should be 
noted he was not in the mental state to make sound decisions. The 
thoughts of suicide, losing all he ever worked for, how to 
support his family, and disturbing images of war, are the 
thoughts that relentlessly consumed his days. For these reasons, 
he was not capable of making a reasonable decision regarding his 
rating decision and compensation, not realizing how it would 
impact the rest of his life. 

 

With continued therapy over the past three years along with 
extensive research, he has come to the determination that 
although he will never be healed, an unjust decision was made on 
his behalf and should now be corrected. 

 

The applicant provided an additional letter from his former First 
Sergeant and discharge summaries from Cedar Springs Behavioral 
Health Center and Parkview Medical Center. 

 

The applicant's complete response, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit E. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial. The applicant has 
not met his burden of proof of an error or injustice that 
warrants the desired change of the record. There is also no 
suggestion that any error or injustice occurred during his PEB 
process. 

 

The Medical Consultant states given the information which was 
available at the time of the MEB, including the interview with 
the applicant, the USAF psychiatrist came to a logical diagnosis 
after a complete and through examination. One might ask, 
therefore, why other providers later came up with PTSD as a 
different diagnosis. Anxiety Disorder, NOS and PTSD are both 
Mood Disorders, and they share many common features, which are 
outlined in detail in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) 
of Mental Disorders. The fact that a previous provider may have 
stated that a patient has PTSD is not sufficient evidence to 
conclude the diagnosis is correct. It is clear from the record 
the USAF psychiatrist did diligently attempt to determine if PTSD 
was indeed present, and came to the conclusion that, at the time, 
it was not. Additionally, the USAF psychiatrist cogently 
communicated the reasons for the conclusions which she reached. 

 

The complete BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit 
F. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 


 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

In Nov 11, he submitted several forms of documentation supporting 
his case. After reading the recommendation of the BCMR Medical 
Consultant, it is clear this information was not reviewed 
properly. In the facts and discussion sections of the advisory 
it states the diagnosis of PTSD was subsequent to his discharge 
by the DVA. However, this is false, the documentation of medical 
records dating back to Jul 07 and Aug 08 clearly diagnoses him 
with PTSD, proving the diagnosis was prior to his MEB narrative 
summary dated 2 Sep 08, and prior to his discharge on 30 Jan 09. 

 

The applicant’s complete response, and attachments, is at Exhibit 
H. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 

 

1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing 
law or regulations. 

 

2. The application was timely filed. 

 

3. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice warranting 
relief. We note that both AFPC/DPSD and the BCMR Medical 
Consultant have recommended denial of the applicant’s request to 
have PTSD included in his disability rating computation so that 
his combined rating would entitle him to a permanent disability 
retirement. In considering the applicant’s contentions, we 
acknowledged that prior to his medical separation from the Air 
Force, the applicant had been admitted twice to a civilian 
hospital, once on or about 3 Jul 07 with a diagnosis of 
Depressive Disorder, Not Otherwise Specified (NOS) and PTSD [at 
which time he reported being depressed and anxious for the past 
six months and that, as a deployed medic, he “saw people die 
every day”] and again on or about 10 Aug 08, when he was given a 
diagnosis of Mood Disorder, NOS, and PTSD. After leaving 
military service, the applicant received service connection and a 
rating evaluation of 70 percent from the DVA only for the primary 
diagnosis of PTSD, and neither an Anxiety Disorder nor a 
Personality Disorder. We also took into consideration the 
commander’s concerns for the applicant’s ability to perform 
duties in garrison and in a deployed environment, citing “it is 
the graphic nature and trauma of performing, Respiratory 
Technician duties which set off the chain of events leading to 
the applicant’s suicidal ideations and subsequent diagnosis.” 
After collectively considering the totality of evidence, to 
include the civilian mental health assessments and the post-


service mental health assessments by the DVA, we have determined 
that PTSD was the more appropriate basis for the applicant’s 
release from military service. Addressing the disability rating 
for PTSD, we are aware that as a result of the National Defense 
Authorization Act of 2008, Military Departments were prohibited 
from utilizing Service or Departmental rating policies and were 
held to only utilizing the rating standards of the DVA or 
mutually [DoD/DVA] agreed upon policies. Thus, understanding 
that 38 C.F.R. [Veterans Schedule for Rating Disabilities], 
Section 4.129 addressing PTSD, which reads: “When a stressful 
event is severe enough to bring about the veteran’s release from 
active military service, a disability rating of no less than 
50 percent will be assigned, followed by the scheduling of an 
evaluation within 6 months following the veteran’s discharge to 
determine whether a change in evaluation is warranted.” After 
consideration of the probative value of the 70 percent assigned 
by the DVA for the applicant’s PTSD and the lack of competing 
post-service evidence of improvement or worsening of the 
condition within the 12 months after separation, we determined 
that permanent retirement with a 70 percent disability rating is 
appropriate. We find this action consistent with the additional 
guidance memorandum, dated 17 Jul 09, from the Under Secretary of 
Defense, Personnel & Readiness, the purpose of which was to 
facilitate uniform corrective measures where a Military 
Department failed to follow Section 4.129, which directs, “as a 
matter of policy, all three BCMRs to apply Section 4.129 to PTSD 
unfitting conditions for applicant’s discharged after 11 Sep 01, 
and that in such cases, where a grant of relief is appropriate, 
assign a disability rating of not less than 50 percent for PTSD 
unfitting conditions for an initial period of six months 
following separation, with subsequent fitness and PTSD ratings 
based upon applicable evidence.” This retroactive six-month 
period can be best characterized as a de facto Temporary 
Disability Retired List (TDRL) status with the subsequent fitness 
and rating disposition based upon the available or applicable 
evidence. Thus, with invoking of Title 38, C.F.R., Section 
4.129 and utilizing the probative value of the rating assigned by 
the DVA within three months following the applicant’s release 
from active duty, we believe that permanent retirement with a 
70 percent disability rating due to PTSD, effective on the 
previously established date of discharge [30 Jan 09], is 
appropriate. Therefore, we recommend the applicant’s records be 
corrected as 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 on 

 


a. On 29 Jan 09, the applicant was found unfit to perform 
the duties of his office, rank, grade, or rating by reason of 
physical disability, incurred while he was entitled to receive 
basic pay; that the diagnosis in his case was Post Traumatic 
Stress Disorder, a condition which is rated at a compensable 
percentage of 70 percent under Veterans Administration Schedule 
for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) code 9411; 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 30 Jan 09, he was relieved from active duty and on 
31 Jan 09, he was permanently disability retired in the pay grade 
of Staff Sergeant with compensable percentage for physical 
disability of 70 percent for PTSD. 

 

 c. The election of Survivor Benefit Plan option(s), will be 
corrected in accordance with the member’s expressed and/or as 
otherwise provided for by law or the Code of Federal Regulations. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2011-04514 in Executive Session on 14 Aug and 13 Sep 
12, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

, Panel Chair 

, Member 

, Member 

 

All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The 
following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 25 Oct 11, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSD, dated 16 Dec 11. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Dec 11. 

 Exhibit E. Rebuttal, Applicant, dated 15 Jan 12, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit F. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 

 16 Jun 12. 

 Exhibit G. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 26 Jun 12, w/atch. 

 Exhibit H. Letter, Applicant, not dated, w/atchs. 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair