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