RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05878

					COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO 



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His administrative discharge be changed to a medical retirement.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

During his last two years of service, he suffered from anxiety and 
depression which affected his ability to pass his Fitness 
Assessments (FA) and ultimately led to his being discharged.  He 
was also diagnosed with sleep apnea prior to his discharge.

His Primary Care Manager (PCM) initially requested a Medical 
Evaluation Board (MEB) for his medical condition; but he believes 
his commander interfered with the process which resulted in him 
not receiving a proper diagnosis or support from his mental health 
provider.  He had to seek treatment off base because his commander 
and mental health provider believed he was faking his mental 
health issues.  He sought advice from his mental health provider 
regarding an MEB, but was told because his treatment was not on 
base; it was not admissible in an Air Force MEB.  

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 19 Apr 00, the applicant commenced his enlistment in the 
Regular Air Force.

On 27 Apr 11, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was 
recommending his discharge from the Air Force for Unsatisfactory 
Duty Performance – Failure to Meet Minimum Fitness Standards.  The 
specific reasons for the discharge action were:

	a.  On 26 Feb 09, the applicant failed to meet minimum 
fitness standards by scoring a composite score of 45.40 points on 
his Fitness Assessment (FA), which was below the minimum required 
composite score of 75 points.

	b.  On 26 May 09, the applicant failed to meet minimum 
fitness standards by scoring a composite score of 69.80 points on 
his FA, which was below the minimum required composite score of 75 
points.

	c.  On 24 Aug 09, the applicant failed to meet minimum 
fitness standards by scoring a composite score of 74.20 points on 
his FA, which was below the minimum required composite score of 75 
points.

	d.  On 5 Jan 11, the applicant received a Letter of Reprimand 
(LOR) for failing to meet the minimum fitness standards by scoring 
a composite score of 57.00 points on his 10 Dec 10 FA, which was 
below the minimum required composite score of 75 points.

	e.  On 6 Apr 11, the applicant received a LOR and a 
Unfavorable Information File (UIF) was established for his failing 
to meet minimum fitness standards by scoring a composite score of 
18.60 points on his 5 Apr 11 FA, which was below the minimum 
required composite score of 75 points.

On 18 May 11, after consulting with legal counsel, the applicant 
waived his right to an administrative discharge board.

The legal office reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient 
to support separation and recommended the applicant be furnished 
an honorable discharge without probation and rehabilitation.

On 25 May 11, the discharge authority directed the applicant be 
furnished an honorable discharge without probation and 
rehabilitation.  On 10 Jun 11, the applicant was so discharged and 
credited with 11 years, 1 month, and 22 days of active service.

Per AFI 36-2905, Fitness Program, a commander may recommend 
discharge once a service member receives four unsatisfactory FA 
scores in a 24-month period.


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an 
error or an injustice.  A commander may invalidate FA results if 
the individual provides medical documentation validating the 
existence of an illness or injury.  The commander must provide 
written notification to the Fitness Assessment Cell (FAC) when 
invalidating FA results.  The applicant did not provide any 
medical documentation confirming he had a medical issue precluding 
him from passing his FA or written notification from his commander 
invalidating the FA.

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

AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial noting the documentation in the 
applicant’s master personnel records indicates the discharge, to 
include the type of separation, separation code, narrative reason 
for separation, and character of service was consistent with the 
procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge 
instruction and was within the discretion of the discharge 
authority.  The applicant has not provided any evidence or 
identified any errors in the processing of his discharge.  The 
applicant by receiving four unsatisfactory FAs in a 24-month 
period and failed to meet and maintain AF fitness standards.  His 
unit’s attempts to rehabilitate him through administrative means 
were unsuccessful.  He was provided ample opportunities to comply 
with fitness standards.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit D.

The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial indicating there 
is no evidence of an error or injustice.  The applicant has not 
provided any evidence showing he had a medical condition which 
rendered him unfit for continued military service.  Although his 
records contain entries which suggest he exhibited symptoms of an 
anxiety disorder during certain periods throughout his enlistment, 
there is no evidence that the condition was of such severity that 
it interfered with his ability to perform his assigned duties or 
was the cause of his FA failures.  The applicant’s medical records 
do not contain any psychological profiles, mental health 
evaluations or other clinical/mental health documentation that 
would substantiate his claim of an unfitting mental disorder as 
the reason for his FA failures.  While the Department of Veterans 
Affairs (DVA) has awarded him a service connection for 
agoraphobia, Gulf War, Incurred, there is no evidence that this 
condition was the cause of his repeated FA failures.  

A complete copy of the AFBCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is 
at Exhibit E.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the 
applicant on 21 Jul 14 for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit F).  As of this date, no response has been received by 
this office.




ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The AFBCMR Psychology Consultant recommends denial indicating 
there is no evidence of an error or injustice.  There was no 
evidence provided or in the applicant’s medical record that would 
substantiate that he should have been medically retired rather 
than administratively discharged.

The applicant first encountered mental health on 18 Jun 07 with 
complaints of depression associated with a marital separation and 
was subsequently diagnosed with major depression.  His records 
also noted smoking and overeating.  During his Nov 08 post 
deployment evaluation the applicant reported stress due to his 
pending divorce.  He was offered a mental health referral but 
declined.  On 24 Nov 09, the applicant was seen by primary care 
for chest pain that he attributed to the pressure he felt during 
his fitness assessment after multiple failures.  On 18 Jun 10, he 
was seen by primary care and it was noted the he was not taking 
his medication because it made him drowsy.  He further reported he 
had been experiencing persistent panic attacks for nine months and 
believed it was associated with him thinking about running.  While 
he reported the panic attacks were significant and were occurring 
daily, he did not seek any treatment.  The applicant indicated he 
had an upcoming fitness assessment that was exacerbating his 
anxiety and that he underwent a stress test which required 
monitoring afterwards due to his elevated pulse.  The medical 
notes from the stress test revealed the applicant’s functional 
capacity, heart rate, and blood pressure were all normal and the 
overall test was negative.  On 30 Jun 10, it was noted the 
applicant had some improvement with his anxiety with the use of 
medication.  In Jan 11, he reported to primary care that he was 
unable to do the sit up portion of his fitness assessment due to 
his heart racing, sweating, and difficulty breathing.

The applicant had a pattern of difficulty with his FAs for much of 
his military career as well the ability to bounce back from 
receiving a poor FA score and obtain a passing FA score.  Despite 
his struggles with his FAs, his service record clearly shows he 
performed well in the duties required of his Air Force specialty 
code (AFSC).  It is clear from documentation found in the medical 
record that consideration was given to the applicant as he 
continued to fail multiple FAs.  Furthermore, the medical 
documentation does not support the applicant’s mental health 
condition met the threshold necessary for consideration through 
military disability evaluation systems (MDES).  There is no 
evidence to override the conclusions that the applicant was 
medically fit for service at the time of his administrative 
discharge.

The Psychology Consultant notes the applicant’s initial ratings 
provided by the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) for panic 
disorder and major depression; however, the MDES operates under 
Title 10, United States Code (U.S.C.) and bases its actions upon 
the evidence present at the “snap shot” in time of final military 
disposition.  The DVA, operating under a different set of laws 
with a different purpose, is authorized to offer service 
connection and compensation for any medical condition for which it 
has established a nexus with military service, without regard to 
the narrative reason for release from service or the length of 
time transpired since discharge.  The DVA is also empowered to 
conduct periodic reevaluations for the purpose of adjusting the 
disability ratings at the level of impairment for a given medical 
condition may vary over the lifetime of the veteran.

A complete copy of the AFBCMR Psychology Consultant’s evaluation 
is at Exhibit G.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the additional Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the 
applicant on 11 May 15 for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit H).  As of this date, no response has been received by 
this office. 


THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

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

2.  The application was timely filed.

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 opinions and 
recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility 
(OPR), the AFBCMR Medical Consultant, and the AFBCMR Psychological 
Consultant and adopt their rationale as the basis for our 
conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of 
injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, 
we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief.


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-2013-05878 in Executive Session on 15 Jun 15 under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 Dec 13.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 24 Mar 14.
	Exhibit D.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 17 Apr 14.
	Exhibit E.  Memorandum, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, 
	            dated 25 Jun 14.
Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Jul 14.
Exhibit G.  Memorandum, AFBCMR Clinical Psychology
            Consultant, dated 8 May 15.