RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04733 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her entry level separation with an uncharacterized character of service be changed to an honorable discharge. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Her shoulder injury was not a pre-existing condition. She never had any problems with her right shoulder until her fourth week of Basic Military Training (BMT). The Air Force would not have put her through a Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), Computer Tomography (CT) scan and physical therapy for three months before discharging her if the condition was pre-existing. She requests the Board consider her application in the interest of justice as she is trying to get treated for her major depression that she has been dealing with since 7 Jun 08. She hurt her shoulder while she was in the Air Force and also witnessed a person attempt suicide while she was in medical hold. She is trying to get her discharge upgraded so she can get help from the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) for her depression. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 12 Feb 08, the applicant entered active duty. On 26 Jun 08, the applicant’s commander notified her of his decision to recommend her discharge from the Air Force In Accordance With (IAW) Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, Chapter 5, Section C, Defective Enlistments, for erroneous enlistment. The specific reason for this action was a medical narrative summary dated 9 Jun 08, stating that she did not meet the minimum medical standards to enlist due to her shoulder pain. On 26 Jun 08, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification and waived her right to consult counsel and declined to submit statements in her own behalf. On 26 Jun 08, the staff judge advocate found the discharge recommendation legally sufficient. On 27 Jun 08, the discharge authority approved the recommendation. On 30 Jun 08, she received an entry level separation with an uncharacterized character of service. Her narrative reason for separation is “Failed Medical/Physical Procurement Standards.” She served 4 months and 20 days on active duty. On 22 May 13, the DVA denied the applicant’s requests for disability compensation for right shoulder pain due to osteochondroma and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Rationale for the disapproval was that the conditions were not service connected. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial. Based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge to include the Separation Program Designator (SPD) code, narrative reason for separation and character of service was appropriately administered and within the discretion of the discharge authority. The applicant did not provide any evidence that an error or injustice occurred in the processing of her discharge. Airmen are given an entry level separation/uncharacterized service characterization when separation is initiated in the first 180 days of continuous active service. The Department of Defense (DOD) determined if a member served less than 180 days of continuous active service; it would be unfair to the member and the service to characterize their limited service. Since the applicant was on active duty for 134 days when the discharge action was initiated, she must be separated with an entry level discharge IAW AFI 36-3208, para 5.2.2. Therefore, the uncharacterized character of service which resulted in the Reentry (RE) code of “4C” which denotes “Separated for concealment of juvenile records, minority, failure to meet physical standards for enlistment, failure to attain a 9.0 reading grade level as measured by the Air Force Reading Abilities Test (AFRAT), or void enlistments” on her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, is correct and IAW DOD and Air Force instructions. The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C. AETC/SGPS recommends denial. Based on the documentation on file in the applicant’s records, the separation was IAW established policy and administrative procedures. A review of her records and medical notes from Wilford Hall Medical Center (WHMC) reveals that on 24 Mar 08 she was seen for a shoulder injury when she slipped on some stairs and reached back to grab the rail to break her fall which resulted in severe shoulder pain. She was administered an MRI and it was noted that she had an osseous excrescence projecting dorsally from the right anterior second rib abutting the adjacent first rib. It was felt that this represented an osteochondroma. Although a benign finding, it may account for her right chest wall pain. She was provided physical therapy for an extended period of time and it appears by the medical documentation that there was some improvement. She opted to decline a waiver and chose to separate. She stated that she understood the separation policy and was processed for an entry level separation. The complete SGPS evaluation is at Exhibit D. The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial. He acknowledges the applicant’s possible desire to receive care and compensation from the DVA for non-sexual traumatic exposure during military service and notes that entry level separation and uncharacterized service may have been an obstacle to achieving eligibility. However, the burden of proof of error or injustice in the narrative reason from service and uncharacterized service has not been met. The Medical Consultant acknowledges the implicit conclusion that a presumably previously asymptomatic individual who then becomes symptomatic after performing a certain activity during military service could have developed a new condition or permanently aggravated a pre-existing medical condition after entering military service. Although the applicant was given a variety of presumptive diagnoses to explain her pain, none were considered permanently disqualifying or warranted processing through a Medical Evaluation Board. On 24 Jun 09, the applicant declined a waiver to stay in the Air Force and was processed for entry level separation with an uncharacterized character of service. Further it has been over 5 years since the applicant’s discharge and there is no evidence presented to demonstrate a permanent worsening of the applicant’s osteochondroma above and beyond its expected natural progression; particularly in the context of her otherwise normal radiographic and MRI studies conducted on her right shoulder and her reported clinical improvement prior to discharge. The complete BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit E. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 18 Aug 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit F). As of this date, this office has not received a response. ________________________________________________________________ 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 opinions and recommendations of the Air Force Offices of Primary Responsibility (OPR) and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting any of the relief sought in this application. 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 our understanding of the issue involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that 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 BC-2013- 04733 in Executive Session on 18 Sep 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 26 Sep 13, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 8 Jan 14. Exhibit D. Letter, AETC/SGPS, dated 17 Apr 14. Exhibit E. Letter, BCMR Medical Advisor, dated 16 Jul 14. Exhibit F. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Aug 14.