RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03224 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. His records be corrected to reflect that his service- connected disability of Schizophrenia is combat related. 2. Item 7, Years of Service Under 10 USC 1208, of his AF Form 356, Findings and Recommended Disposition of USAF Physical Evaluation Board, be corrected to reflect he was credited with four years total active service, instead of three. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 1. His disabling condition occurred as a direct result of Hazardous Service and began when he was flying missions over Iraq enforcing the “No Fly Zone.” He was awarded the Aerial Achievement Medal for exhibiting airmanship and courage under potentially hazardous conditions during the period of 11 September 1993 to 29 April 1994 and it was at this time that he started hearing voices. 2. His AF Form 356 should reflect four years instead of three as he served in the Air Force from 1 May 1991 to 28 July 1995 as reflected on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant’s military personnel records indicate that he enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 1 May 1991. On 19 June 1995, the applicant was relieved from active duty and placed on the temporary disability retired list (TDRL), effective 29 July 1995, with a combined compensable disability rating of 50 percent. On 22 April 1997, the Secretary of the Air Force directed the applicant to be removed from the TDRL and permanently retired for physical disability, with a combined compensable disability rating of 50 percent for his non-combat related Schizophrenia. On 24 April 1997, the applicant was removed from TDRL and retired in the grade of Senior Airman per Air Force Instruction 36-3212 with a compensable percentage of 50 percent for physical disability, effective 14 May 1997. The applicant was credited with 4 years, 2 months, and 28 days total active service for retirement. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) which is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSDD recommends denial, indicating the preponderance of evidence reflects that no error or injustice occurred in the applicant’s disability processing. There is no evidence in the record to show particular combat stressors as the cause of the applicant’s schizophrenia, as well as, meeting the criteria for combat relatedness due to performance of duties while engaging in hazardous service. The applicant was evaluated at the mental health clinic following admission of hearing voices to a co-worker and had been experiencing auditory hallucinations. He was diagnosed with schizophrenia, paranoid type with considerable impairment of social and industrial adaptability. Since his condition was not stabilized, the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) recommended his placement on the TDRL with a disability rating of 50 percent. At that time, they also found that his disability was non-combat related. The applicant concurred with the findings. If the applicant did not agree with the IPEB’s recommendation, he could have appeared before the Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB) represented by counsel or he could have submitted a rebuttal and his case would have been forwarded to the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) for their review and finalization. However, he did not do so. Finally, after a TDRL re-evaluation, the IPEB recommended the applicant be removed from TDRL, and permanently retired with a disability rating of 50 percent. The applicant did not concur with IPEB’s final recommendation and requested review by the SAFPC. SAFPC directed the applicant’s removal from TDRL and permanently retired him with a disability rating of 50 percent. The applicant failed to exercise his appeal rights twice during the process of review. The applicant’s disabilities were appropriately considered for combat relatedness during the disability evaluation process (DES) and the applicant has provided no additional evidence beyond that which was reviewed and evaluated during his DES processing. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSDD 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 11 October 2012 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D). ________________________________________________________________ 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 an error or injustice with respect to the applicant’s request that his Schizophrenia be determined to be combat related. 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 (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice with respect to the determination that his Schizophrenia was not combat related. As for his request related to the amount of active service indicated on his AF Form 356, Findings and Recommended Disposition of the USAF Physical Evaluation Board, we are not convinced the applicant’s record is erroneous. In this respect, we note the AF Form 356 correctly reflects that the applicant had been credited with three years of active service at the time the form was published. While the applicant argues that his DD Form 214 reflects he served more than four years of active duty, the DD Form 214 was published several months subsequent to the AF Form 356, at which point he had served more than four years of active duty. Therefore, in the absence of 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 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-2012-03224 in Executive Session on 2 May 2013, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 29 June 201, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSDD, dated 20 September 2012. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 October 2012. Panel Chair