ADDENDUM RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01627-2 

						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His medical retirement be changed to include combat-related.

RESUME OF THE CASE:

On 23 Jan 14, the Board considered and denied a request for correction of military records submitted by the applicant.  The Board took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, found no evidence that the applicant had been a victim of an error or injustice and found the applicant provided no evidence to conclude that his discharge documents from the Air Force should be corrected to reflect Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or his PTSD be found combat related.                   

For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s appeal, and, the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see Record of Proceedings at Exhibit F.

On 4 Oct 15, the applicant requested reconsideration of his request for his medical retirement be changed to include combat-related (Exhibit G).  He contends that the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) service connected his PTSD due to his military deployments, effective 30 Jun 09.

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

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 H.    

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Psychiatric Consultant recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice.  The psychiatrist at the applicant’s final TDRL review considered his diagnosis of PTSD and noted that although the applicant was rated by the DVA for PTSD, the applicant has not in the past and did not at the time of the end of his TDRL display the full complement of symptoms of PTSD.  The applicant does have symptoms of a mental health condition, but it is only those symptoms that are in common with his current condition of Mood Disorder with Bipolar features and due to a General Medical Condition without Psychotic features, that cut short his military career.  Additionally, in his post deployment evaluation, the applicant was quite emphatic, that he did not experience any kind of emotional trauma and was not symptomatic of any disorder at that time.  Deployment to a war zone does not in and of itself cause PTSD.  The applicant also notes, that he was a non-combatant and while he did report an explosion, he did not in any way indicate in his earlier evaluations that he was traumatized by the experience.

The applicant’s final evaluator reported in his assessment, that he was not reporting symptoms of PTSD other than those symptoms that are also seen in other conditions including the conditions for which he was diagnosed.  It is also clear the applicant was able to engage in life experiences, that patients with PTSD are not able to enjoy such as his extended stay trip to Europe or babysitting young children or even engaging in something as creative as being an artist.  Lastly, the applicant’s rating for compensation at the end of his TDRL has only to do with his level of impairment and his number of diagnoses.  The applicant was in a combat zone but his injuries were not combat-related.

A complete copy of the BCMR Psychiatric Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit H.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 10 May 17 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit I).  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

After again reviewing this application and the evidence provided in support of his appeal we remain unpersuaded the evidence presented demonstrate the existence of an 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 BCMR Psychiatric Consultant and adopt their 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-2013-01627-2 in Executive Session on 13 Jun 17 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

				    , Panel Chair
					, Member
				 , Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit F.  Original Record of Proceeding, dated 27 Mar 14,
  w/Exhibits A through E.
	Exhibit G.  DD Form 149, dated 4 Oct 15.
	Exhibit H.  Memorandum, BCMR Psychiatric Consultant, dated
  3 Apr 17.
	Exhibit I.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 10 May 17.

Pursuant to paragraph 1 of AFI 36-2603 (Title 32 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 865.1), it is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled matter.

1 2