RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02025
		INDEX NUMBER: 100.00

	XXXXXXX	COUNSEL:  
	XXXXXXX	HEARING DESIRED:  YES

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  19 Sep 06

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.	All references to a diagnosis of personality disorder or adjustment disorder, not otherwise specified, be removed from his records.

2.	The SF Form 600, Chronological Record of Medical Care, dated 29 October 2000, be removed from his records.

3.	The SF Form 88, Report of Medical Examination, dated 10 September 2000, be amended.

4.	His records be corrected to show that on 30 June 2001, he was not voluntarily transferred to the Retired Reserve, but on that date, he retired by reason of physical disability, with a 70% rating, and that he receive all retroactive retirement pay.

5.	He be reimbursed for all medical expenses incurred, including any medical insurance premiums paid, from 30 June 2001 to 90 days following the date his records are corrected and he is placed him on the permanent retired list.

_________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His career was prematurely ended by a medical separation which resulted from post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), caused by homosexual assaults and intimidation by a supervisor in violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and substantiated by an Air Force Investigation.

The applicant’s counsel states, in part, that the Air Force failed to properly diagnose and treat the applicant’s medical conditions.  Further, the Air Force improperly and without scientific basis, determined that the applicant was the cause of his medical condition, by virtue of a personality disorder which was not present at his entry into active duty, but which the Air Force contended did not rise to the level of a disability.  Further, the applicant’s transfer to the Retired Reserve was coerced, since he was threatened with return to the same environment of sexual harassment, or loss of all accrued benefits for failure to attend Reserve drills, if he did not request to be assigned to the Retired Reserve.  By virtue of the classification of his condition as a personality disorder, inaccurate and highly prejudicial medical information was erroneously placed in his official military record.

In support of the appeal, counsel submits an affidavit from the applicant, extracts from the applicant’s military records, and Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) rating decisions.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Prior to transferring to the Air Force Reserve on 10 August 1990, applicant had prior service in the Marine Corps, the Army National Guard and the Army Reserve.  He reenlisted in the Air Force Reserve on 10 December 1995, for a period of six years.  On 9 October 2000, he underwent a retirement physical and was not found medically qualified for world wide duty.  On 29 November 2000, he requested to be transferred to the Retired Reserve, effective 30 June 2001.  His request was approved and on 30 June 2001, he was transferred to the Retired Reserve.  He will be eligible to receive retired pay on 27 April 2009.

On 30 Jul 2003, the DVA awarded him a compensable disability rating of 70% for PTSD with schizotypical features.  On 7 January 2004, the DVA increased his rating to 100%.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that the evidence of record indicates the applicant experienced significant psychiatric difficulties unrelated to military service for many years including personality disorder and symptoms of depression and symptoms suggestive of PTSD related to childhood traumas.  The applicant was twice hospitalized for symptoms of depression with suicidal ideation in 1984 and 1990, and subsequently placed on disability from his civilian occupation in 1993 for psychiatric disability due to schizotypical personality disorder aggravated by work.  He repeatedly failed to accurately disclose significant aspects of his medical background during periodic evaluations and on a security clearance document.  Had this information been properly revealed by the applicant at the time he completed these examinations, it is likely he would have been rejected for enlistment in the Air Force Reserves in 1990 or subsequently administratively separated due to the disqualifying history of recurrent hospitalizations and disability unemployment due to psychiatric illness.  Concealing significant information on medical examinations and a security clearance form is considered misconduct and grounds for administrative discharge.  Although the applicant may exhibit symptoms of PTSD of variable degree combined with symptoms of his personality disorder, the preponderance of evidence indicates the main underlying condition is the applicant’s personality disorder.  Whether the incidents while on active duty caused permanent aggravation of his condition beyond the natural course of the disease is not clear since he had been twice hospitalized previously and was previously disabled from civilian employment in the years before the incidents during Reserve duty.

The BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant’s counsel on 25 May 2005 for review and response within 30 days.  On 20 June 2005, the application was temporarily withdrawn at counsel’s request.  

In a letter, dated 9 September 2005, the applicant’s counsel requested the application be reopened and provided a statement from the applicant.  The applicant states, in part, that the evaluation contains several inaccuracies.  The BCMR Medical Consultant, aided by some military reports that include misinformation, mixes up various medical/psychological evaluations from a span of nearly four decades and seems to lump them together when it is convenient in an apparent attempt to suit a particular interpretation.  He seems to have pulled together bits and pieces of various reports to present a one-sided profile.  Further, although the evaluation insinuates that he was emotionally disabled prior to the 1997 sexual assault, at least two Air Force physicians declared him fit for duty prior to the sexual assault.

Counsel’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit G.

_________________________________________________________________

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.  After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that relief should be granted.  Applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, we do not find these assertions, in and by themselves, sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the BCMR Medical Consultant.  Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the BCMR Medical Consultant and adopt his rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  Based on the foregoing, and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

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-2004-02025 in Executive Session on 6 October 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 25 Nov 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 19 May 05.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 May 05.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Counsel, dated 20 Jun 05.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 24 Jun 05.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, Counsel, dated 9 Sep 05, w/atchs.