RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02638 

 

 COUNSEL: NO 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

Her official records be corrected to reflect that she was 
medically retired due to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

She was unjustly allowed to leave active duty on 9 Oct 10 after 
she had been diagnosed with PTSD. She should have been retained 
on active duty until her medical case was processed through the 
Air Force Disability Evaluation System (DES) and she was granted 
retirement for medical disability. She presents as evidence, 
her 8 Nov 07 Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) determination 
that her 50 percent disability rating for PTSD is service 
connected. 

 

During her deployment to Afghanistan in 2006, her traumatic 
experiences included: 

 

 1. She was the victim of rape and met with a rape 
counselor, but was not prepared to deal with the trauma 
associated with officially reporting the incident. 

 2. She had to photograph the scene of an Improvised 
Explosive Device (IED) attack in which someone she knew had been 
killed, and while there she found a body part. 

 3. She befriended a Marine who was killed days later. 

 

In support of her appeal, the applicant provides copies of her 
DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active 
Duty, excerpts from her military and civilian medical records, 
and her DVA Rating Decision. 

 

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

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

 

 

 


STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant entered the Air Force on 10 Jun 98 and served on 
active duty until her Honorable Discharge on 9 Oct 06. She was 
credited with eight years and four months of total active 
service. 

 

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 attached at Exhibit C. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial of the 
applicant’s request for medical retirement, indicating there is 
no evidence of an error or injustice. Addressing the 
applicant’s mental health-related contention, the supplied 
Service treatment documentation reflects the applicant had 
previously received care for an Adjustment Disorder during Jan 
and Feb 02, and again in Oct 02, which had been reportedly 
present since the Jun 01 birth of her child. 

 

The Military Disability Evaluation System (DES), operating under 
Title 10, United States Code (U.S.C), can only offer 
compensation for and when a service-incurred illness, disease, 
or injury rendered a member unfit for continued service and was 
the cause for career termination; and then only for the degree 
of impairment present at the “snap shot” at the time of release 
from military service and not based on future changes or events. 
The evidence does not clearly reflect the applicant’s diagnosis 
interfered with her ability to perform her military duties to 
the extent that warranted processing through the military DES 
for medical separation and retirement. Indeed, although the 
applicant was prescribed an anti-depressant prior to and after 
her return from a deployment, she was deemed well-controlled, 
was cleared for deployment, and was found Worldwide Qualified 
after her return from Deployment. 

 

The DVA on the other hand, operating under Title 38 U.S.C, is 
authorized to offer compensation for any medical condition 
determined service incurred or aggravated, without regard to its 
impact upon a service member’s retainability, fitness to serve, 
or narrative reason for release from military service. This is 
the reason why an individual can be found fit for service 
despite the presence of a medical condition and yet sometime 
thereafter receive a compensable rating from the DVA for the 
service-connected, but militarily non-unfitting condition. 
Thus, the presence of a medical condition that was not unfitting 
while in service, and was not the cause of separation or 
retirement, that may later progress in severity causing 
disability or was merely determined service connected by the 
DVA, is not a basis to retroactively grant a military medical 
retirement. 


 

There is no evidence to show the applicant’s ability to perform 
her military duties was adversely impacted by PTSD or Depression 
to the extent that warranted conducting an MEB. Neither is 
their evidence of inadequate duty performance caused by mental 
disorder. The applicant has not convincingly met the burden of 
proof of a material error or injustice. 

 

The complete AFBCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at 
Exhibit C. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

On 24 Jun 11, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded 
to the applicant 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. 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 of injustice. Therefore, in the 
absence of evidence 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-2011-02638 in Executive Session on 22 March 12, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Vice Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 27 Jun 11, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, dated 

 12 Dec 11. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 20 Dec 2011. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Vice Chair