RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-01696
		INDEX NUMBER:  145.00
	XXXXXXX	COUNSEL:  None

	XXXXXXX	HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to add a diagnosis of post traumatic stress syndrome (PTSD) with a 70% disability rating by the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) that evaluated him on 26 Oct 77.

His records reflect that he was awarded a combined compensable rating of 84% by the PEB that convened on 26 Oct 77.

His records be corrected to reflect that he was retired effective 6 Dec 77 with a combined compensable disability rating of 80%.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Air Force medical personnel did not diagnose or document his PTSD because PTSD was not formalized as a compensable disease process in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) of Diseases until 1981, four years after he was medically retired.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a copy of his approved application for Combat-Related Special Compensation and other documents.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant entered active duty in the Air Force 23 Mar 62.  On 27 Sep 77, a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) convened to consider the applicant’s fitness for continued active duty.  The MEB established four diagnoses on the applicant and recommended he be referred to an Informal Physical Evaluation Board.  On 6 Oct 77, the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) convened and diagnosed the applicant with (1) persistent low back pain associated with degenerative changes and left shoulder pain associated with psycho physiological musculoskeletal disorder, with moderate impairment and (2) bilateral tinnitus.  The conditions were given a combined compensable rating of 46%.  The applicant was found unfit because of physical disability.  On   17 Oct 77, the applicant disagreed with the IPEB recommendation and requested a formal hearing.

On 26 Oct 77, a Formal PEB (FPEB) convened and added the diagnosis of degenerative arthritis, cervical spine and left shoulder to the two previous diagnoses by the IPEB.  The FPEB recommended a combined compensable rating of 51%.  On 26 Oct 77, the applicant disagreed with the findings and recommendations of the FPEB.  The applicant’s case was referred to the Secretary of the Air Force (SECAF) Physical Review Council.  On 7 Nov 77, the SECAF Physical Review Council concurred with the FPEB.  On 15 Nov 77, the SECAF directed that the applicant be placed on the Permanent Disability Retired List with a disability rating of 50%.  The applicant was permanently retired for disability effective 6 Dec 77.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPD recommends denial of the applicant’s request.  Records indicate that the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) rated the applicant’s PTSD after he was already medically retired.  His CRSC application was approved by their office based on medical data provided by the DVA since he is an Air Force retiree.  Being treated for a medical condition while on active duty does not automatically mean that the condition was/is unfitting for continued military service at the time.  To be unfitting, the medical condition must be such that it by itself precludes the person from fulfilling the purpose for which he or she is employed.  Air Force disability boards can only rate unfitting medical conditions based upon the individual’s medical status at the actual time of the evaluation board.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

In his response to the Air Force evaluation, applicant states that he disagrees with the conclusion that he was treated fairly by the Air Force Disability Evaluation System in that no effort was ever made to determine if any post-combat trauma was present, its extent, and what treatment by the Air Force and afterwards would be necessary.  Although PTSD did not formally appear in the DSM until after 1981, it had been recognized in previous wars under other names, e.g., “shell shock” and “combat fatigue.”  The applicant believes it was overlooked to his detriment thus making his treatment within the DES totally inadequate.  He believes that his appeal should be approved since the military chose not to do anything to aid him in his battle with the debilitating PTSD.

Applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

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 agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office 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.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling 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 BC-2004-01696 in Executive Session on 3 August 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 19 May 04, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPPD, dated 9 Jun 04.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Jun 04.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 5 Jul 04.