RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-02735

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO 


________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  Her narrative reason for separation be changed to reflect medical rather than miscellaneous/general reasons.

2.  She be evaluated by a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB).
________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

While on active duty, she was sexually assaulted.  Although she sought medical care days after the assault, she believes she was 
not provided adequate support or allowed the appropriate time to adjust or recover after the incident due to her chain of 
command’s attitude towards the assault.  She separated from the Air Force within a year after her assault due to her emotional 
problems.  Her frame of mind after the sexual assault affected her ability to make a reasonable decision regarding her 
separation.  She was not provided adequate counseling regarding her options during the discharge process.  

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 27 Feb 07, the applicant commenced her enlistment in the Regular Air Force.

On 17 Jul 10, the applicant presented to the emergency room 
reporting she was sexually assaulted the previous evening.  

On 11 Jun 11, the applicant submitted a request for voluntary 
separation noting she was having difficulties coping with the 
Air Force since the sexual assault.  She noted the assailant was 
from another branch of military service.  She further noted she 
was having difficulties with being separated from her husband 
who was her biggest supporter.

On 25 Jul 11, the applicant was honorably released from active 
duty with a narrative reason for separation as miscellaneous/ 
general reasons.  She was credited with 4 years, 4 months, and 
29 days of active service.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial noting there is 
no evidence of an error or injustice with respect to the 
applicant’s separation from the Air Force.  While on active duty 
the applicant was sexually assaulted.  Although she received 
appropriate emergent care and follow-up counseling, her medical 
condition was never considered to have interfered with her 
duties to warrant extended profile restrictions, long-standing 
prohibition of worldwide qualification, or referral for a 
Medical Evaluation Board (MEB).  This is evidenced by her 
consistent release to duty without restrictions, except for one 
three-month period, throughout her period of treatment; 
following which she was, again, returned to duty without 
restrictions.  She alleges she was not provided adequate support 
by her chain of command.  However, there is no evidence showing 
she was subject to any reprisal, disciplinary action, or gender 
discrimination due to her chain of command’s lack of support.

As for the portion of her request for a medical 
separation/retirement, the military Disability Evaluation System 
(DES) was established to maintain a fit and vital fighting force 
and can by law only offer compensation for those service 
incurred diseases or injuries which specifically rendered a 
member unfit for continued active service and were the cause for 
career termination; and then only for the degree of impairment 
present at the time of separation and not based on future 
occurrences.  Under the Department of Defense Instruction (DODI) 
1332.32, Physical Disability Evaluation, a service member shall 
be considered unfit when the evidence establishes that the 
member, due to physical disability, is unable to reasonably 
perform the duties of his or her office, grade, rank, or rating 
to include duties during a remaining period of Reserve 
obligation.  Therefore, while the applicant’s record does 
reflect she sought and received mental health counseling prior 
to her separation, there is no indication that her condition was 
determined to be so severe as to warrant processing through the 
military DES.

As for her contention she was not given adequate or proper 
support and treatment, the medical entries in her records 
reflect she received regular and follow-up care throughout her 
military service.  The Medical Consultant notes the heightened 
concerns for sexual assault in the military services, and the 
instances in which improper or no actions were taken against the 
assailants. Although documentation related to the legal 
proceedings have not been supplied, the applicant reports that 
her assailant was found guilty via court-martial and sentenced 
to two years in prison.  

The Department of Defense (DOD) and the Department of Veterans 
Affairs (DVA) operate under a different set of laws with 
different purposes.  The DVA is authorized to offer compensation 
for any medical condition with an established nexus with 
military service, without regard to its demonstrated or proven 
impact upon a service member's retainability, fitness to serve, 
narrative reason for release from service, or the length of 
intervening time since release from service.  The laws that 
govern the DVA compensation system allow awarding compensation 
ratings for conditions that were not unfitting during military 
service or at the time of separation.  This is the reason why an 
individual can be found fit for release from military service 
for one reason and sometime thereafter receive a compensation 
rating from the DVA for a service-connected, but not militarily 
unfitting condition.  The DVA is also empowered to conduct 
periodic re-evaluations for the purpose of adjusting the 
disability rating awards (increase or decrease) as the level of 
impairment from a given service connected medical condition may 
vary (improve or worsen) over the lifetime of the veteran.

A complete copy of the AFBCMR Medical Consultant’s 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 10 Sep 13 for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit C).  As of this date, no response has been received by 
this office.

________________________________________________________________

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.  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 AFBCMR Medical Consultant and adopt his rationale as the 
basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim 
of an error or injustice with respect to her discharge 
processing.  The applicant contends that due to the trauma of 
being sexually assaulted she should have been evaluated by a 
medical evaluation board (MEB) and receive a medical discharge.  
However, we find no evidence of a medical condition of such a 
severity that it rendered the applicant unfit to perform her 
duties, thus warranting evaluation through the disability 
evaluation system (DES) at the time of her separation.  The 
applicant further alleged she was not provided adequate support 
by her rating chain following the sexual assault.  However, 
there is no evidence she was prohibited from seeking medical 
care (to include mental health) or subjected unfair treatment by 
her chain of command.  Ultimately, while we are very sensitive 
to the applicant’s plight, neither the evidence of record, nor 
the documentation provided by the applicant are sufficient for 
us to conclude that she should have been found unfit at the time 
of her separation and, thus, entitled to processing under the 
DES.  As indicated by the AFBCMR Medical Consultant, the 
Department of Defense can only offer disability compensation for 
unfitting conditions that caused the early termination of a 
member’s military career.  On the other hand, the Department of 
Veterans Affairs is empowered to evaluate any medical condition 
incurred in the line of duty, not just those rendering a member 
unfit, and provide disability compensation.  As such, we believe 
the applicant would be well-served to avail herself of the 
services of the DVA to ensure that any potential chronic effects 
of the sexual assault are appropriately treated and evaluated in 
the proper venue.  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-2013-02735 in Executive Session on 17 Apr 14, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-02735 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 18 Jun 13, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, 
	            dated 6 Sep 13.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 10 Sep 13.


Dear APPLICANT:

	After careful consideration of your application for correction of military records, AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-02735, the Board determined there 
was insufficient evidence of an error or injustice to warrant corrective action.  Accordingly, your application is denied.

	You have the right to submit a request for reconsideration by the Board.  However, such a request must be accompanied by newly discovered relevant 
evidence that was not available at the time of your original application.  Absent such additional evidence, further consideration of your application is 
not possible.  Additionally, the reiteration of facts previously addressed by the Board, uncorroborated personal observations, or additional arguments on 
the evidence of record is also not grounds for reopening a case.

	Should you decide to submit a request for reconsideration of your case, please forward your request and any supporting evidence to the address 
below where it will be reviewed to determine if it meets the criteria for reconsideration by the Board:

			SAF/MRBR
			550 C Street West Suite 40
			Randolph AFB TX 78150-4742 

	THIS ACTION IS TAKEN UNDER THE AUTHORITY DELEGATED BY THE SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE.

		
		Executive Director
		Air Force Board for Correction
		of Military Records
1 2