RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2016-03832

XXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL: NONE

	HEARING: YES

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be corrected in Block 28 to reflect a disability discharge instead of completion of required active service. 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was incorrectly diagnosed with depression in 2006 and the correct diagnosis should reflect Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).  He would like this reflected on his DD Form 214 so that he is entitled to all benefits associated with a medical discharge.  The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 21 Jun 06, per medical records provided by applicant, he was diagnosed with depression.

Per AF IMT 910, Enlisted Performance Report (AB thru TSGT), closing date of 25 May 07, the applicant received a “4” out of “5” rating.

On 30 Aug 08, the applicant was furnished an honorable discharge with a narrative reason for separation reflecting “completion of required active service” as an Air Force staff sergeant and was credited with 9 years, 10 months and 17 days active service to include no foreign service

On 17 May 13, per Department of Veteran Affairs memo, provided by the applicant, his rating increased from 30 percent to 100 percent effective 8 Jun 11.

On 1 Oct 13, the Social Security Administration found the applicant to be disabled.

For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B and the advisory at Exhibit C.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFBCMR/Psychiatric Advisor recommends denying the application.  Through the eyes of the military, it was clear that the applicant performed his duty at a level 4, which was only one step down from outstanding.  While the applicant claims that his diagnosis should have been PTSD instead of depression while he was still in the military, he did not display the required symptomatology required for a PTSD diagnosis until after his discharge.  The Psychiatrist did not write out his full assessment of the applicant’s condition, so there was no way to know the severity being described.  The applicant was initially granted a 30 percent disability rating by the DVA, making it reasonable to assume a decrease in his performance, but based on his honorable discharge, it was not sufficient enough to make him unfit.  The new memo on Liberal Consideration was designed to address those veterans who received less than honorable discharges due to a psychiatric condition, which mitigated misconduct.  By this reasoning, it is clear that both the military and the DVA decisions are correct and not incompatible. 

The complete advisory is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Board sent a copy of the Air Force evaluation to the applicant on 26 Jun 18 for comment (Exhibit D), but has received no response.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The application was not 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 or injustice.  The Board concurs with the rationale and recommendation of AFBCMR Psychiatric Advisor and finds that a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions.  Furthermore, the Board also notes the applicant did not file the application within three years after the alleged error or injustice was discovered, or should have been discovered, as required by Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552, and Air Force Instruction 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR).  Moreover, the applicant has offered no plausible reason for the delay in filing the application.  The Board finds the application untimely and concludes it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the delay.  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 application was not timely filed; it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the delay; 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-2016-03832 in Executive Session on 1 Aug 18:

, Panel Chair
, Panel Member
, Panel Member

The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, received 26 Sep 16.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Advisory opinion, AFBCMR/MH/Psychiatric, dated 6 Jun 18.
Exhibit D:	Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 26 Jun 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.