RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                   DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00098	
	   	   		    COUNSEL:  NONE
     	  			    HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________ 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Mental Health (MH) diagnosis be included as an unfitting and 
compensable condition.   

________________________________________________________________ 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He received a MH diagnosis in Sep to Oct 02 timeframe that was 
not considered.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.  

________________________________________________________________ 

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 3 Apr 84, the applicant entered active duty.

According to AF Form 618, Medical Board Report, dated 20 Sep 00, 
the applicant was referred to the Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) 
for diagnosis of lumbar spondylosis with degenerative disk 
disease.

According to AF Form 356, Findings and Recommended Disposition 
of USAF Physical Evaluation Board, dated 13 Oct 00, the Informal 
Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) determined his medical 
condition did not prevent him from performing less strenuous 
duties commensurate with his office, grade, rank or rating.  The 
IPEB found the applicant fit and recommended he be returned to 
duty.    

According to a Medical Narrative Summary (NARSUM) dated 12 Mar 
02, his Primary Care Manager (PCM) recommended that he be 
medically boarded out of the military as it was doubtful he 
would ever be able to work full days again based on the duration 
of his symptoms and the worsening of his symptoms as a result of 
chronic low back pain with degenerative disk disease.    

According to a letter dated 3 Apr 02, the PEB returned the MEB 
recommendation on the applicant requesting a neurology consult 
and appropriate psychiatric profile.  

According to a NARSUM dated 3 Jul 02, he was evaluated by MH on 
28 Jun 02 and his final diagnosis was “depression secondary to 
general medical condition, now resolved.”  The NARSUM further 
states there was no contribution of any underlying psychiatric 
diagnosis, which would impact his diagnosis of chronic back 
pain.  He has experienced a depressive episode as a result of 
his chronic pain, which at this time is resolved.  

According to AF Form 1180, Action on Physical Evaluation Board 
(PEB) Findings and Recommended Disposition, on 8 Aug 02, the 
applicant non-concurred with the IPEB recommendation that he be 
Discharged With Severance Pay (DWSP) with a 20 percent 
disability rating for chronic low back pain with degenerative 
disk disease and requested a formal hearing.    

According to AF Form 356, Findings and Recommended Disposition 
of USAF Physical Evaluation Board, dated 5 Sep 02, the Formal 
PEB (FPEB) recommended the applicant be permanently retired with 
compensable percentage of 40 percent for an unfitting condition 
of “chronic low back pain secondary to degenerative disk 
disease.”  

According to AF Form 1180, dated 5 Sep 02, the applicant 
concurred with the findings and recommendation of the FPEB.

On 12 Sep 02, the Secretary of the Air Force directed the 
applicant be permanently retired under the provisions of 
10 U.S.C. § 1201. 

According to Special Order Number ACD-01012, dated 30 Sep 02, he 
was retired on 16 Nov 02 in the pay grade of Technical Sergeant 
(TSgt, E-6) with a compensable percentage of physical disability 
of 40 percent.  His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or 
Discharge from Active Duty, reflects a narrative reason for 
separation of “Permanent Disability.”

He served 18 years, 7 months and 13 days on active duty.  

On 30 Jan 03, the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) rated the 
applicant at a compensable percentage of 90 percent for service 
connected disability for conditions of degenerative joint 
disease, chronic muscle tension type headaches, stone disease 
secondary to gout, gouty arthritis, hypertension, residuals, 
arthroscopic arthrotomy, tinnitus, chronic sinusitis, rhinitis 
and eczema.  

________________________________________________________________ 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Physical Disability Board of Review (PDBR) Special Review 
Panel (SRP) recommends there be no change of the applicant’s 
disability and permanent disability retirement determination. 
After due deliberation in consideration of the preponderance of 
evidence, the SRP concluded that there was insufficient cause to 
recommend a change for the condition, and therefore, no 
disability ratings can be recommended.

The SRP first determined if any MH diagnoses were changed during 
the Disability Evaluation Process (DES).  The first MEB 
performed on 19 Sep 00 did not refer a MH diagnosis.  His 
profile on 18 Mar 02 did not have a MH condition and had a 
psychiatric level 1 (S1) profile.  The NARSUM dated 12 Mar 02, 
mentioned a memory problem thought to be due to pain and daily 
use of narcotic medications. The MEB psychiatric evaluation 
consultation on 28 Jun 02 documented an Axis 1 diagnosis of 
depression secondary to general medical condition, now resolved.  
The neurology MEB performed on 28 Jun 02 also did not document a 
MH diagnosis but recommended higher dose anti-depressants and 
lower dose, to no opiates, for pain control.  Further, the MEB 
performed on 16 Jul 02 and the FPEB performed on 5 Sep 02 did 
not include a MH diagnosis. 

After consideration of the evidence, and full review of the 
medical record, the SRP determined that no MH diagnoses were 
changed to the applicant’s possible disadvantage in the DES 
process.  Therefore, the applicant did not meet the inclusion 
criteria in the Terms of Reference for the MH Review Project.  
The MH condition, depression secondary to general medical 
condition, now resolved, was reviewed and considered by the SRP.  
The psychiatric consultation for the MEB addendum performed on 
28 Jun 02 documented a history of depressed mood, irritability, 
poor sleep, energy, interest, concentration and guilt for a 
period of several months with the precipitant being the back 
pain which improved once placed on profile, and working half 
days.  At the time of the consultation, he did not endorse 
symptoms of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).  A MH status 
examination revealed a neatly groomed, pleasant, cooperative 
individual who was uncertain as to why he needed to be seen in 
the clinic.  The MH condition was resolved, was not profiled, 
and was not mentioned in the commander’s statement or the MEB 
references and statements.  There was no indication that the MH 
condition interfered with the applicant’s performance of his 
military duties.     

The complete PDBR SRP evaluation is at Exhibit C.  

________________________________________________________________ 

?
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 9 Jan 14, 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 not received a response.

________________________________________________________________ 

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 error or injustice.  We took notice 
of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of 
the case and do not find that it supports a determination that 
he was improperly retired from active duty.  Therefore, we agree 
with the opinion and recommendation of the Physical Disability 
Board of Review (PDBR) Special Review Panel (SRP) and adopt the 
rationale expressed as the basis for our conclusion that the 
applicant has failed to sustain his burden of proof that he has 
been the victim of an error or injustice.  In view of the above 
and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis 
to favorably consider the applicant’s request.

________________________________________________________________ 

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that 
that 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 Docket Number BC-
2014-00098 in Executive Session on 21 Oct 14, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      , Panel Chair
      , Member
      , Member






The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number 
BC-2014-00098 was considered: 

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 16 May 13   
     Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records
     Exhibit C.  Letter, PDBR SRP, dated 31 Dec 13.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Jan 14.