RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-01334
		INDEX CODE:  108.00
		COUNSEL:  

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His discharge be changed to reflect that he was discharged for medical reasons; or in the alternative, his case be referred to a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His tenure in the Air Force was marked by a number of episodes that should have keyed his supervisors into knowing that he suffered from severe depression and an inability to cope.  The Air Force had indications that he suffered from a learning disability as early as June 1984.  He was counseled for failing to satisfactorily complete a basic reading and comprehension test.  A review of the counseling confirms that he was having significant difficulty completing the exam and he was required to enroll in remedial reading and comprehension exams in order to finish the tests.  His difficulties can be traced back to a traumatic incident which pushed him into a state of psychiatric depression.  In 1983 he was notified of the death of his father.  He immediately fell into a state of despondency.  His reaction to the news appears to be significantly greater than the norm.  He went into a phase of uncontrollable crying and spent several months nearly unable to speak or perform his duties.  He sought treatment for his depression but did not receive it.  He was simply told to tough it out and that he would get over it.  Had he received proper medical treatment at the time, significant future problems may have been avoided.  More importantly, he should have been medically discharged as a result of this significant mental illness.  

In the years that followed his discharge he suffered from a number of medical problems, all of which can be traced to his medical condition while on active duty.  He has been treated for sleep apnea, narcolepsy, and a sudden onset of weight gain.  The diagnosis of hypersomnia required heavy medication in order to get him through the workday.  He was evaluated by a psychiatrist who diagnosed his condition as Major Depression, Recurrent type, Deferred, Narcolepsy/Sleep Apnea.  The psychiatrist specifically links his current psychiatric problems with his military service stating that his diagnosis was precipitated by the event of his father's death and that he did not receive the appropriate psychiatric treatment at the time.  It was further noted that he never saw a psychiatrist while he was on active duty and that there was no medical intervention.  The link between his current problems and his military service seems clear.  Had he received treatment at the time of his father's death his current problems could have been avoided.  In the military environment, service members may be reluctant to seek mental health counseling.  However, in the applicant's case, the treatment was never offered.  In spite of the warning signs around them, his supervisors failed to ensure that he received appropriate medical care for his very obvious depression.  

In support of his request, applicant provided his counsel's brief, letters from his psychiatrists, documents associated with his Department of Veterans' Affairs (DVA) disability claim, a Certificate of Training, documents associated with his separation processing, his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty; and his DD Form 215, Correction to DD Form 214.  His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 19 Apr 83 and was progressively promoted to the grade of sergeant.  He served as a Telecommunications Systems Maintenance Specialist until 15 Apr 87, at which time he was honorably released from active duty under the Early Release program.  He served 3 years, 11 months, and 27 days on active duty.  Subsequent to his active duty service, he served in the Air National Guard (ANG) as an Electronic Cryptographic Communications Equipment Specialist from 19 Apr 88 to 18 Apr 91.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial.  The consultant states that his service records contain numerous entries for a variety of medical problems but none for any complaints of depressed mood, including in 1983 when his father died.  There is no evidence of sleep complaints or learning difficulties noted in the service medical records.  He did not have a separation physical examination.  He requested an examination but was separated before the exam was accomplished.  However, he underwent a complete examination in March 1988 when he enlisted in the ANG.  On the SF 93, Report of Medical Examination, dated 23 Mar 88, the applicant reports his present health as "good."  He checked "No" to questions regarding depression, sleep and learning problems including frequent trouble sleeping, depression or excessive worry, nervous trouble of any sort, loss of memory or amnesia, attempted suicide, or any other somatic symptoms that sometimes accompany depression or anxiety.  A DVA rating decision denied his claim for service connection for depression, narcolepsy and sleep apnea concluding that these conditions neither occurred nor were caused by service.  

There is no evidence that he exhibited any symptoms of depression, sleep disorder of pathologic learning difficulties while on active duty or in the ANG.  None of the conditions that he was treated for were unfitting for service.  There is no evidence that he was denied care by his supervisors or medical personnel or that there were symptoms, which should have suggested that he required referral for evaluation.  The evidence he provided from his civilian providers is dated several years after his discharge.  The learning disability he contends he has was not unfitting for service and evidence shows that he was able to successfully complete rigorous technical training both wile on active duty and in the ANG.  The Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPD recommends denial.  DPPD states that his medical records show he was treated for various conditions while on active duty, however, none were identified to be serious or life threatening enough to require referral through the Air Force military disability evaluation system.  All indications show that he was reasonably capable of performing his military duties as an Electronic Cryptographic Communications Equipment Specialist and as a Telecommunications Systems Maintenance Specialist.  There is no indication that his current conditions occurred during his military service.  He has not provided evidence to show an injustice occurred at the time of his voluntary release from active duty.  The DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Counsel states that the focus of the applicant's contention is that his current diagnosis of severe depression is directly linked to his military service and the Air Force's failure to properly treat him for depression after his father's death.  His psychiatrist unequivocally states that his current medical condition was due to the Air Force's failure to properly treat him at the time of his father's death.  DPPD's statement that there is no evidence that his depression was so severe as to warrant intervention while the applicant was on active duty, is precisely the point.  His claim is that he should have been treated while on active duty.  His complete submission is at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

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 error or injustice.  We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we do not find his uncorroborated assertions sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air Force.  We see no evidence, which would lead us to believe that at the time of his separation, a physical condition existed that would have disqualified him from worldwide military service.  Therefore, we see no reason why he would have been eligible for consideration in the disability evaluation system.  We agree with the opinions and recommendation of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  In the absence of persuasive 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 that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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 02-01334 in Executive Session on 26 Mar 03, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 13 May 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 2 Jan 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 29 Jan 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Feb 03.
    Exhibit F.  Counsel's Letter, not dated