RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2016-01818

	COUNSEL: 
	
	HEARING: YES

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The finding of him being “unfit for duty” be reversed, and he be reinstated to the Air Force Reserve.  

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The “unfit for duty” finding was based on the stigma associated with mental health in the military.  
The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

During the matter in question, the applicant was serving in the Air Force Reserve in the grade of Major (O-4).

On 29 Jul 15, the applicant was informed that the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) found the applicant unfit to perform duties of his office, grade, rank, or rating for VA Code 9434, diagnosis Major Depressive Disorder.  

On 30 Jul 15, the applicant elected to have his case referred to the Air Force Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB).

 On 18 Sep 15, the Air Force FPEB found the applicant unfit to perform duties of his office, grade, rank, or rating for VA Code 9434, diagnosis Major Depressive Disorder.  

On 1 Oct 15, the applicant appealed the findings of the FPEB to SAF Personnel Council (SAFPC). 

On 28 Mar 16, SAFPC advised the applicant they concurred with the determination of the FPEB and found him unfit for continued military service.  

On 12 Dec 16, the applicant was honorably discharged in accordance with (IAW) AFI 36-3209, Separation and Retirement Procedures for Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve Members, para 2.16, Physical Disqualification.  
For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B and the advisories at Exhibits C and D.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPFDD recommends denying the application.  The applicant was referred to the IPEB for Non-Duty Fitness determination in Jul 15 for Major Depressive Disorder (MDD).  He was found unfit for duty by the IPEB for MDD.  The applicant non-concurred and appealed to the FPEB.  The FPEB upheld the prior recommendation of the unfit determination; he non-concurred with a further appeal to SAFPC.  In Mar 16, SAFPC concurred with the prior two-board recommendation of unfit for duty.  There is no indication an error or injustice occurred at the time the PEB processed the SM’s Non-Duty Fitness determination.  The complete advisory is at Exhibit C.

AFBCMR Psychiatric Consultant recommends denying the application.  This is the third appeal of his “unfit for duty” finding.  The Psychiatric Consultant finds the applicant’s determination admirable, however, she agrees with the preceding recommendations.  IAW Medical Standards Directory (MSD) depressive disorders that do not resolve with SSRIs or other first-line therapy; serious psychiatric illnesses that result in hospitalization; Bipolar disorder; and conditions which require continuing psychiatric support beyond one year, disqualify airman for continued military service.  Given the applicant’s history, she opines, the applicant will require long-term psychiatric management  and returning him to the military possesses uncertain risks of recurrence of mental health illness when he is confronted with stressors beyond his span of control; particularly under operational conditions confronted by all Military Departments, regardless of Service component or career field.  The decisions of the Military Department did not represent an error or injustice.  The complete advisory is at Exhibit D.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Board sent copies of the Air Force evaluations to the applicant on 26 Apr 18 for comment (Exhibit E), but has received no response.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The application was timely filed.

2.  The applicant exhausted all available avenues of non-judicial relief before applying to the Board.

3.  After thoroughly reviewing all Exhibits, it is the Board’s opinion that the applicant is not the victim of an error and injustice.  The Board concurs with the rationale and recommendations of 
AFPC/DPFDD and the AFBCMR Psychiatric Consultant, and finds that a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions.  Therefore, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s records.

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 the Board’s understanding of the issues involved.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The applicant be informed the evidence did not demonstrate material error or injustice, and the application will only be reconsidered upon receipt of relevant evidence not already considered by the Board.

The application was adjudicated without a personal appearance.

CERTIFICATION:

The following quorum of the Board, as defined in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), paragraph 1.5, considered Docket Number BC-2016-01818 in Executive Session on 5 Jun 18:

All members voted not to correct the record.  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 2 May 16.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Advisory opinion, AFPC/DPFDD, dated 19 Jul 16.
Exhibit D:	Advisory opinion, AFBCMR Psychiatric Consultant, dated 22 Mar 18
Exhibit D:	Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 26 Apr 18.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.