RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03224 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

1. His records be corrected to reflect that his service-
connected disability of Schizophrenia is combat related. 

 

2. Item 7, Years of Service Under 10 USC 1208, of his AF Form 
356, Findings and Recommended Disposition of USAF Physical 
Evaluation Board, be corrected to reflect he was credited with 
four years total active service, instead of three. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

1. His disabling condition occurred as a direct result of 
Hazardous Service and began when he was flying missions over 
Iraq enforcing the “No Fly Zone.” He was awarded the Aerial 
Achievement Medal for exhibiting airmanship and courage under 
potentially hazardous conditions during the period of 
11 September 1993 to 29 April 1994 and it was at this time that 
he started hearing voices. 

 

2. His AF Form 356 should reflect four years instead of three 
as he served in the Air Force from 1 May 1991 to 28 July 1995 as 
reflected on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or 
Discharge from Active Duty. 

 

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

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant’s military personnel records indicate that he 
enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 1 May 1991. 

 

On 19 June 1995, the applicant was relieved from active duty and 
placed on the temporary disability retired list (TDRL), 
effective 29 July 1995, with a combined compensable disability 
rating of 50 percent. On 22 April 1997, the Secretary of the 
Air Force directed the applicant to be removed from the TDRL and 


permanently retired for physical disability, with a combined 
compensable disability rating of 50 percent for his non-combat 
related Schizophrenia. 

 

On 24 April 1997, the applicant was removed from TDRL and 
retired in the grade of Senior Airman per Air Force Instruction 
36-3212 with a compensable percentage of 50 percent for physical 
disability, effective 14 May 1997. The applicant was credited 
with 4 years, 2 months, and 28 days total active service for 
retirement. 

 

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 at Exhibit C. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSDD recommends denial, indicating the preponderance of 
evidence reflects that no error or injustice occurred in the 
applicant’s disability processing. There is no evidence in the 
record to show particular combat stressors as the cause of the 
applicant’s schizophrenia, as well as, meeting the criteria for 
combat relatedness due to performance of duties while engaging 
in hazardous service. 

 

The applicant was evaluated at the mental health clinic 
following admission of hearing voices to a co-worker and had 
been experiencing auditory hallucinations. He was diagnosed 
with schizophrenia, paranoid type with considerable impairment 
of social and industrial adaptability. Since his condition was 
not stabilized, the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) 
recommended his placement on the TDRL with a disability rating 
of 50 percent. At that time, they also found that his 
disability was non-combat related. The applicant concurred with 
the findings. If the applicant did not agree with the IPEB’s 
recommendation, he could have appeared before the Formal 
Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB) represented by counsel or he 
could have submitted a rebuttal and his case would have been 
forwarded to the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council 
(SAFPC) for their review and finalization. However, he did not 
do so. 

 

Finally, after a TDRL re-evaluation, the IPEB recommended the 
applicant be removed from TDRL, and permanently retired with a 
disability rating of 50 percent. The applicant did not concur 
with IPEB’s final recommendation and requested review by the 
SAFPC. SAFPC directed the applicant’s removal from TDRL and 
permanently retired him with a disability rating of 50 percent. 
The applicant failed to exercise his appeal rights twice during 
the process of review. The applicant’s disabilities were 
appropriately considered for combat relatedness during the 
disability evaluation process (DES) and the applicant has 


provided no additional evidence beyond that which was reviewed 
and evaluated during his DES processing. 

 

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSDD evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the 
applicant on 11 October 2012 for review and comment within 30 
days. As of this date, no response has been received by this 
office (Exhibit D). 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 with respect 
to the applicant’s request that his Schizophrenia be determined 
to be combat related. 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 (OPR) and adopt its rationale 
as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the 
victim of an error or injustice with respect to the 
determination that his Schizophrenia was not combat related. As 
for his request related to the amount of active service 
indicated on his AF Form 356, Findings and Recommended 
Disposition of the USAF Physical Evaluation Board, we are not 
convinced the applicant’s record is erroneous. In this respect, 
we note the AF Form 356 correctly reflects that the applicant 
had been credited with three years of active service at the time 
the form was published. While the applicant argues that his DD 
Form 214 reflects he served more than four years of active duty, 
the DD Form 214 was published several months subsequent to the 
AF Form 356, at which point he had served more than four years 
of active duty. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the 
contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief 
sought in this application. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: 

 

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material 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-2012-03224 in Executive Session on 2 May 2013, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 Panel Chair 

 Member 

 Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 29 June 201, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSDD, dated 20 September 2012. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 October 2012. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair