RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-00162 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: YES 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His records be corrected to show that he was medically retired 
from military service. 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He was discharged for medical reasons and certified to be 
medically disqualified for world-wide duty under the provisions 
of AFR 160-43, Medical Examination and Medical Standards, by 
reason of chronic pain, instability, limited range of motion and 
strength of his left shoulder. His medical condition and reason 
for discharge has greatly limited his ability to function and 
perform daily without extreme pain. 

 

In support of the application, the applicant submits his 
Department of Veterans Affairs Disability (DVA) Rating Decision, 
and a copy of the Summarized Record of Proceedings from his 
Administrative Discharge Board (ADB). 

 

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

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 26 February 
1973 and was progressively promoted to the rank of sergeant. 

 

On 13 December 1976, the applicant was referred to an orthopedic 
surgeon for an assessment of his left shoulder. The applicant was 
given a diagnosis of scapulothoracic derangement and treated with 
carbocaine. 

 

On 24 December 1976, the DVA granted a service-connected 
disability rating of 0 percent for his shoulder ailment; 
however, on 14 May 1979, that rating was increased to 10 
percent. 

 

On 23 December 1976, he was honorably discharged from active duty 
after serving 3 years, 9 months and 28 days and transferred into 
the Air Force Reserve. 

 

 


On 8 April 1978, during a Reserve enlistment physical 
examination, as documented on a Standard Form 88, Report of 
Medical Examination, comments were made the applicant 
demonstrated instability of the left shoulder and was not world-
wide qualified. In addition, a medical entry on Standard Form 
600, Chronological Record of Medical Care, read "injured left 
superior scapular area 1975 in Thailand - struck by refrigerator; 
treated and follow-up by the DVA. 

 

On 31 May 1978, AFRC/SG notified the applicant that he was 
disqualified for further military service by reason of chronic 
pain, instability, with limited range of motion and strength of 
the left shoulder. 

 

On 12 October 1978, an Administrative Discharge Board determined 
the applicant should be discharged under the provisions of AFR 
35-41, Separation Procedures for USAFR Members, because he was 
permanently medically disqualified for service in the Air Force 
Reserve. On 25 February 1979, the applicant was honorably 
discharged from the Air Force Reserve. 

 

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, 
extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in 
the letter prepared by the BCMR Medical Consultant at Exhibit E. 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFRC/SG recommends denial of the applicant's request and states 
that he was deemed medically disqualified for world-wide active 
military service due to chronic pain in his shoulder. However, 
since they have no authority to convene a physical evaluation 
board, they are unable to provide a recommendation on his request 
for a medical retirement 30 years after his discharge. 

 

The complete AFRC/SG evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

AFRC/A1K recommends denial of the applicant's request and concurs 
with the AFRC/SG recommendation. 

 

The complete AFRC/A1K evaluation is at Exhibit D. 

 

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial of the applicant's 
request. 

 

The applicant was discharged as a result of an Administrative 
Discharge Board action which found him medically disqualified for 
military service. Air Force Regulation (AFR) 35-41, Volume Ill, 
Section B, Paragraph 6-1 3, Administrative Discharge Board for 
Physical Disqualifications, reads: "An administrative discharge 
board convened in physical disqualification cases is not a 
physical evaluation board, nor is it a board of inquiry; thus, 
the board is not qualified or authorized to make medical 
determinations. The functions and duties of the board are limited 
to making findings and recommendations concerning whether a 


medical determination of disqualification has been made by the 
appropriate surgeon (as in a Major Command or Headquarters) and 
is evidenced in the manner prescribed by AFR 160-43." Further, 
that "the board's function is only to insure that such evidence 
has been considered by the appropriate surgeon, as designated in 
AFR 160-43, in making the determination of qualification or 
disqualification for worldwide duty. Under AFR 160-43, Chapter 3, Medical Evaluation for Continued Military Service, sets forth 
medical conditions that normally preclude continued military 
service and which will result in Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) 
processing under AFRs 35-4 and 168-4 (in effect at the time of 
the applicant's separation). Additionally, under AFR 35-41, 
Volume Ill, Section F, Physical Disqualification, paragraph 5-31, 
"A member who is medically disqualified for worldwide duty under 
the provisions of AFR 160-43 will be separated." Further, that 
"airmen who fail to apply for transfer to the Retired Reserve are 
discharged under this section if: (a) Report of medical 
examination and/or other documents as required have been 
certified by the appropriate surgeon as medically disqualified 
for worldwide duty, and (b) [the member] is not qualified for 
disability separation under provisions of AFR 35-4." The 
applicant asks that his discharge be changed to a "Title 61" 
(Title 10, Chapter 61) medical retirement." Rendering the benefit 
of doubt the applicant's shoulder ailment was service-incurred 
and did not involve misconduct or an absence without official 
leave, the Medical Consultant offers the following assessment and 
likely outcome of the applicant's case. Based upon the clinical 
assessment of the applicant's shoulder, at or about the time of 
discharge, to include his demonstrated strength, range of motion, 
the absence of shoulder instability, and normal X-ray studies, 
notwithstanding the palpable crepitus, or clicking, in the region 
of the scapula, the BCMR Medical Consultant opines that the 
applicant's clinical condition did not rise (would not have 
risen) to the threshold, or severity level, to warrant the 
minimum 30 percent rating required to qualify for the medical 
retirement he desires. The applicant and the Board may also 
review the attached rating guide-lines, under the Veterans 
Administrative Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) code 
(5010) utilized by the DVA in rating the applicant's shoulder 
condition and foot ailment following his discharge as a point of 
reference. The VASRD code utilized indicates (likely by analogy) 
the existence of a diagnosis closely related to a post-traumatic 
degenerative arthritis and directs the rating official to rate 
the condition under degenerative arthritis (which carries a 
maximum rating of 20 percent). In this case, the applicant's 
medical condition was initially given a 0 percent rating, which 
was later increased to a 10 percent rating. Additionally, even 
when considering use of another classification of shoulder 
impairment that's based upon actual shoulder function (strength 
and motion), beginning under VASRD code 5300 series, the 
applicant's documented range of motion and strength, again, does 
not reach the threshold for retirement eligibility. There was 
also no evidence of a neurological basis for the applicant's 
shoulder impairment, as in a cervical radiculopathy; thus, 
ruling-out the use of the 8500 VASRD code series to depict his 


 

In conclusion, the applicant and the Board are reminded that, 
under Title 10, United States Code (USC), disability rating 
determinations made by the Military Departments are based upon 
those conditions that are the cause for career termination; and 
then are rated only to the degree of severity present at the time 
of separation. The applicant was found disqualified for military 
service, by an Administrative Discharge Board only for his 
shoulder condition after completion of an initial term of 
enlistment. The applicant's case was not referred through the 
Military Disability Evaluation System (MDES). Based upon the 
available evidence of record, the Medical Consultant opines, that 
if processed through the MDES (under AFRs 160-43 and 35-4), the 
applicant more likely than not would have been found unfit for 
further military service due to his shoulder condition, but would 
have only been given severance pay with a disability rating no 
greater than l0 percent, based upon the objective physical 
findings present at the time. Whereas, the DVA operating under a 
different set of laws (Title 38, USC), is authorized to offer 
compensation for any medical condition determined to be service 
connected, without regard to its impact upon a service member's 
retainability or ability to perform the mission. The DVA is also 
empowered to periodically re-evaluate and adjust any previous 
disability rating determinations, as the degree of severity or 
level of impairment resulting from a given medical condition may 
vary over the lifetime of the veteran. Therefore, the Medical 
Consultant opines the applicant has not met the burden of proof 
of an error or injustice that justifies a change in the record to 
reflect the medical retirement that he desires. 

 

 

The complete BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit E. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

Copies of the Air Force evaluation were forwarded to the 
applicant on 20 March and 4 September 2009 for review and comment 
within 30 days. As of this date, this office has received no 
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 an error or an injustice. We took 
notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the 
merits of the case. After reviewing the evidence of record, we 
are not persuaded that the applicant’s records are in error or 
that he has been the victim of an injustice. Therefore, we agree 
with the opinion and recommendation of the BCMR Medical 
Consultant and adopt his rationale as the basis for our 
conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or 
injustice. Therefore, we find no compelling basis to recommend 
granting the relief sought. 

 

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 issues 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-2009-
00162 in Executive Session on 30 September 2009, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 14 Jan 09, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFRC/SG, dated 3 Mar 09. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, AFRC/A1K, dated 17 Mar 09. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, BCMR Med Consultant, dated 24 Aug 09. 

 Exhibit F. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 Mar 09. 

 Exhibit G. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 4 Sep 09.