RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-05067

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to reflect he was not discharged from 
active duty on 31 Dec 98, but was retained on active duty for 
medical hold while undergoing surgery and convalescence.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His separation from active duty was not processed properly and 
violated several Air Force Instructions.  The mishandling of his 
separation impacted his civilian life, finances and continued 
participation in the Reserves.

In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of 
documents extracted from his military personnel records.

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant commenced his enlistment in the Regular Air Force 
on 28 May 86.  

On 29 Dec 98, the applicant’s health care provider noted on the 
applicant’s separation physical that he injured both shoulders 
in 1988, that there was no evidence of physical impairment, the 
injury was considered in line of duty and that he may develop 
arthritis in his senior years.  The health care provider 
referred the applicant to Orthopedics for reevaluation and 
treatment plan.

On 31 Dec 98, the applicant was honorably discharged due to 
being twice deferred for promotion.  He was credited with 
12 years and 7 months of active service.  Amended Aeronautical 
Order 0417 placed the applicant on duty as a pilot with an 
effective date of 31 Dec 98 with a projected termination date of 
14 Sep 03.  He subsequently served in the Air Force Reserve and 
is now a member of the Louisiana Air National Guard (ANG).
On 18 Feb 99, the applicant underwent surgery for a torn rotator 
cuff on the left shoulder.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate offices of 
the Air Force, which are attached at Exhibits C and E.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/JA recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an 
error or an injustice.  There was no evidence the applicant had 
a medical condition that warranted referral through the 
disability evaluation system, or placing him on medical hold, or 
denying his voluntary separation.  At the time of the 
applicant’s surgery the rules prohibited placing a service 
member on medical hold for elective surgery and its 
convalescence when they do not warrant termination of active 
duty through the disability evaluation system (DES).  AFI 48-
123, Aerospace Medicine, Medical Examination and Standards 
indicated if the performance of duty 12 months prior to the 
scheduled separation was satisfactory, the service member is 
presumed to be physical fit for continued active duty, 
separation or retirement, unless otherwise indicated by strong 
and convincing evidence.  

A complete copy of the AFPC/JA evaluation is at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 
14 Apr 13 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this 
date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D).

________________________________________________________________

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial indicating there 
is no evidence of an error or injustice.  The Medical Consultant 
notes Air Force policies dictate that when an service member 
sustains an illness or injury while serving a period of active 
military service (31 days or more) and the medical condition 
renders the service member unable to perform his/her military 
duties, the service member will be retained on orders until 
returned to duty without restrictions or processed through the 
DES.  However, there is no evidence showing that his injury 
significantly interfered with his ability to perform the duties 
of his office, grade, rank, and rating for the entire calendar 
year 1998, prior to his release from active duty.  The Medical 
Consultant empathizes with the applicant's wanting to receive 
treatment for his long-standing condition prior to leaving 
active duty; however, the policies in existence at the time, and 
today, prohibit extending the applicant on orders to undergo 
surgery and convalescence. 

A complete copy of the AFBCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is 
at Exhibit D.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

When he initially injured his shoulder he thought it was a minor 
injury.  His shoulder healed enough in the next six months to 
where he was aware of it but was able to function without it 
negatively impacting his life.  However, during the next six or 
seven years his shoulder pain would flare up, but not to the 
point where he wanted to be pulled off flying duty for an 
extended period.  However, within two to three years from his 
separation the pain was more constant; he could no longer sleep 
on his left side and running was uncomfortable.  He is not sure 
if he may have reinjured his shoulder or if it just deteriorated 
over time.  Prior to his leaving active duty he mentioned his 
shoulder pain to various physicians but they did not seem overly 
concerned because his range of motion was adequate.  

He elected to have the surgery after the surgeon discussed the 
pros and cons of the surgery.  He attempted to get the surgery 
scheduled before he separated, but was told there was not enough 
time to do so.  He asked the Military Personnel Flight (MPF) 
about being extended but was told that since he was twice 
deferred for promotion he could not be extended.

The advisory writer stated his surgery was elective.  The two 
post-operation reports reflect he had significant damage to his 
shoulder at the time of his separation in 1998.  Although it was 
not a medical emergency it was medically necessary.  He was able 
to do his job effectively with his injury but his toleration for 
pain does not change the fact his shoulder was injured.  

During the period in question he could not work or look for work 
for eight months, and suffered significant economic loss.  His 
entire discharge process in 1998 was hurried, haphazard, and 
incomplete.  He believes he should have been put on medical 
orders as a Reservist or covered by incapacitation pay for that 
period. 

He has received a 10 percent disability rating for range of 
motion from the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA).  

A complete copy of the applicant’s response, with attachments, 
is at Exhibit G.

________________________________________________________________
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.  The applicant 
contends that he was improperly discharged and should have been 
placed on medical hold in order to undergo surgery and 
convalescence.  We took notice of the applicant's complete 
submission, to include his rebuttal response, in judging the 
merits of the case; however, we do not find the evidence 
presented sufficient to override the rationale provided by the 
Air Force office of primary responsibility and the AFBCMR 
Medical Consultant.  After reviewing the evidence of record and 
the applicant’s submission, we found no evidence showing the 
applicant had an injury that prevented him from performing his 
military duties, or a medical condition that warranted 
consideration by the disability evaluation system (DES) at the 
time of his separation in 1998.  While it is clear the applicant 
did have a medical condition at the time of his separation, 
other than his own assertions, he has provided no direct 
evidence that said condition caused him to be unable to perform 
his military duties in the year leading up to his separation.  
Even though we did not find the evidence sufficient to conclude 
the applicant should have been retained on active duty in 1998, 
should his condition ultimately interfere with his ability to 
perform his military duties as a member of the Air Force 
Reserve, a medical evaluation board (MEB) would have to evaluate 
the applicant’s fitness for duty and make a determination as to 
his fitness for continued service and whether or not he should 
be referred to the disability evaluation system (DES) at that 
time.  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-2012-05067 in Executive Session on 29 Aug 13, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 17 Oct 12, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/JA, dated 5 Apr 13.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Apr 13.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, dated 
                 23 Apr 13.
     Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 23 Apr 13.
     Exhibit G.  Letter, Applicant, dated 7 May 13, w/atchs.




                                   
                                   Panel Chair