RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01535
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He receive a higher disability rating for his Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The disability rating he is currently assigned is too low.
The applicants complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 24 Jul 87.
On 8 Sep 03, the applicant suffered significant injuries to his hands due to an explosion while working on an F-117A tailhook system at Holloman AFB, NM.
On 21 May 04, the applicants injuries were determined to be in-the-line-of-duty (ILOD).
On 29 Nov 07, an Informal Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) adjudicated the non-mental health (MH) conditions as unfitting, with a combined rating of 40 percent. The disability rating did not include any percentage for MH issues. The applicant did not appeal this decision.
On 24 Jan 08, the applicant retired due to permanent disability with a 40 percent disability rating due to burns and lacerations to his hands, after 20 years and 6 months of active service.
On 27 Aug 08, the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) issued the applicant a rating decision granting him a ten percent disability for his service-connected PTSD.
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C.
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Physical Disabilities Review Board (PDBR) Special Review Panel (SRB) recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. The applicant has requested a review of the military disability evaluation of his mental health (MH) condition. In accordance with Secretary of Defense directive for a comprehensive review of Service members who were referred to a disability evaluation process between 11 Sep 01 and 30 Apr 12 and whose MH diagnoses were changed or eliminated during that process, the applicants case file was reviewed regarding diagnosis change, fitness determination, and rating of unfitting MH diagnoses in accordance with the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) §4.129 and §4.130.
In Jan 06, the applicant was correctly diagnosed as having PTSD for several years prior to entering the Disability Evaluation System (DES) process. The SRPs charge with respect to the MH conditions that were determined to be not unfitting is to accomplish an assessment of the appropriateness of the fitness adjudication. The threshold for countering not-unfit determinations requires a preponderance of evidence. The diagnosis of PTSD was documented throughout the applicants medical history and the commanders statement indicated the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD which prevented him from being able to work around munitions or explosives. All four annual EPRs written after his injury documented excellent to exceptional job performance in his physically limited capacity. There was no sufficient evidence to support a conclusion that a highly stressful MH event severe enough to bring about the Veterans release from active military service occurred, and the application of VASRD §4.129 is not appropriate in this case. The applicants PTSD condition was not unfitting and therefore could not be recommended for additional disability rating. Recommend there be no change of the applicants disability and separation determination.
A complete copy of the PDBR SRB 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 30 Mar 15 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). 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 applicants complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the PBDR SRB and adopt its 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-2014-01535 in Executive Session on 14 May 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 Jun 13, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Memorandum, PDBR SRP, dated 6 Mar 15.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Mar 15.
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02668
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Physical Disability Board of Review Special Review Panel (PDBR SRP) recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. On 8 Jun 11, during a TDRL evaluation, an Informal PEB (IPEB) found the applicants MH condition was unfitting but stabilized and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140009137
The SRP recommends no change in the applicants unfitting condition diagnosis, and that the applicants prior separation be modified to reflect that the applicant was placed on the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) at 50 percent for a period of 6 months in accordance with (IAW) the Department of Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) section 4.129 and then permanently separated by reason of physical disability with a final 80 percent rating. The SRP considered the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150014155
The applicant requests a review of the military disability evaluation pertaining to a mental health (MH) condition. The PDBR SRP conducted a comprehensive review of the applicant's submissions and records for evidence of inappropriate changes in the diagnosis of an MH condition during processing through the military disability system. The higher 100 percent rating is for total occupational and social impairment. The SRP agreed that there was insufficient cause to recommend a change in...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140015772
The PDBR SRP conducted a comprehensive review of the applicant's submissions and records for evidence of inappropriate changes in the diagnosis of an MH condition during processing through the military disability system. The SRP next considered if there was evidence in the record to support a recommendation of a diagnosis of PTSD, or any other MH condition, for disability rating at TDRL entry. After due deliberation in consideration of the preponderance of the evidence, the SRP concluded...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140009138
The applicant requests a review of the military disability evaluation pertaining to a mental health (MH) condition. The PDBR SRP conducted a comprehensive review of the applicants submissions and records for evidence of inappropriate changes in the diagnosis of an MH condition during processing through the military disability system. The SRP found no comprehensive post-separation evidence in the records provided proximal to the date of the applicant's separation for a more detailed rating...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02572
According to the AF Form 356 dated 25 Apr 12, the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) reviewed the TDRL examination and recommended the applicant be permanently retired with a 30 percent disability for a compensable unfitting condition of PTSD (combat related). The IPEB found evidence of occasional decrease in work efficiency and intermittent periods of inability to perform occupational tasks and recommended permanent retirement with a disability rating of 30 percent In Accordance...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130021006
The PDBR SRP conducted a comprehensive review of the applicant's submissions and records for evidence of inappropriate changes in the diagnosis of an MH condition during processing through the military disability system. The SRP considered the appropriateness of the changes in the MH diagnoses and physical evaluation board (PEB) fitness determination, and, if unfitting, whether the provisions of the Department of Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD), section 4.129, were...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140007635
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The PDBR SRP conducted a comprehensive review of the applicant's submissions and records for evidence of inappropriate changes in the diagnosis of an MH condition during processing through the military disability system. The SRP agreed that the PEB's coding approach (with the recommended application of VASRD, section 4.129, was appropriate to the applicant's TDRL entry and found no rationale for recommending separately ratable conditions at the time of...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02162
The Board should find it in the interest of justice to consider her untimely application as the conditions existed during the former members military service and should have been considered in determining his disability rating. According to an AF Form 356, Findings and Recommended Disposition of USAF Physical Evaluation Board, dated 6 Oct 09, the Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB) concluded the former member was unfit for conditions of bilateral ankle pain, right status-post multiple...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140008198
The applicant requests a review of the military disability evaluation pertaining to a mental health (MH) condition. Its first assessment with regard to the MH condition, under SRP guidelines, was to judge (based on a preponderance of evidence) whether an MH diagnosis was changed or unfairly eliminated during the Disability Evaluation System (DES) proceedings. Furthermore, the conclusion that there was a separately unfitting TBI at permanent retirement was challenged by the observations...