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.