RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01952
				INDEX CODE:  110.00
				COUNSEL:  NONE

				HEARING DESIRED:  Yes, If
								 necessary

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed to allow her to reenter military service.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her RE code is incorrect and needs to be changed.  She was separated from active duty because of her knees.  Since her separation she has seen several doctors and all reports and exams show her knees are normal.

Applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 25 March 1998 for a period of four years.  The applicant’s career field was aircraft structural maintenance.

While in basic training the applicant began experiencing knee pain whenever she stood or walked for any long period of time.  She had pain getting up and down from a seated position and walking up and down stairs and inclines.  She was treated with medication, physical therapy and placed on a physical profile.

On 7 October 1999, an Air Force Form 422 (Physical Profile Serial Report) was established placing the applicant on limited duty until 7 November 1999, prohibiting her from prolonged walking, standing, squatting or climbing stairs.

On 4 November 1999, the applicant was placed on limited duty prohibiting her from squatting, kneeling, prolonged standing or walking until 1 January 2000.

On 7 January 2000, the applicant was placed on limited duty prohibiting her from prolonged standing or walking, squatting, crouching, or kneeling until 7 April 2000.

The 12 January 2000, The Review In Lieu of Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) Narrative Summary stated the applicant had a two-year history of typical patellofemoral pain syndrome, which interfered with her duties and was unresponsive to medication and physical therapy.  The recommendation of the Narrative Summary stated, “There is no operative indication to treat this patient.  Essentially her symptoms are directly related to work activity.  As such, the treatment or the solution that is recommended is to remove her from the environment that is causing her symptoms to persist.  In other words, the patient needs to be in a work environment that does not involve crouching, kneeling, or squatting.  The recommendation is (if the Medical Board determines that she has sufficient retainability) to cross train her into a work type that does not involve squatting, kneeling, or crouching.  Otherwise, a permanent profile change to limit these activities may be considered.”

The commander stated in his letter to the Physical Evaluation Board the applicant was assigned to less strenuous duties which did not require prolonged periods of standing, walking or squatting.  He further stated that the applicant could not be deployed due to her chronic knee pain and that other members of the unit were being required to do her work in addition to theirs.

On 1 February 2000, the applicant underwent an MEB which established a diagnosis of bilateral patellofemoral pain syndrome since 1998.  The MEB referred the applicant to the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB).

On 22 February 2000, the IPEB convened and found the applicant unfit for continued active duty due to her chronic knee pain and recommended she be discharged with severance pay with a ten percent disability rating.  The applicant concurred with the findings and recommendations of the IPEB on 28 February 2000.

On 14 April 2000, the applicant was honorably discharged with disability severance pay and a disability rating of ten percent.  She served 2 years and 20 days of active service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Chief Medical Consultant, AFBCMR, states the applicant was diagnosed with bilateral patellofemoral pain syndrome (chronic knee pain) which interfered with her ability to perform her duties.  Despite therapy for three months which included removal 
from physically stressful duties, medication and physical therapy, the applicant continued to experience pain.  Patellofemoral pain syndrome is a common one that can be due to predisposing factors in the knee that can (but not in all cases) include degenerative processes of the joint or abnormal tracking of the patella (knee cap).  In the applicant’s case, no abnormality was demonstrated.  The knee may be previously asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic or can become symptomatic with the rigors of military training and duties.  In most cases, this condition in the absence of significant predisposing factors responds to rest, medication and physical therapy.  After three months of therapy the applicant was still experiencing pain, which rendered her unfit for continued military service.  The fact that the applicant appears to be doing well now does not exclude the possibility of her knee pain reccurring if she is exposed to the rigors of a military environment.  Patellofemoral pain syndrome that was unresponsive to medication, rest and physical therapy is at a greater risk for recurrence.  The Air Force can not guarantee a sedentary occupation and even those members in sedentary occupations are often required to deploy and perform vigorous activities.  The Medical Consultant, based on the evidence provided, recommends denying the requested relief.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 14 November 2003, for review and response.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.  

_________________________________________________________________

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 of timely file.

3.	Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.  After careful consideration of the circumstances of this case and the evidence of record, we are not persuaded that the discharge action and the resulting reenlistment code she received were in error or unjust.  The applicant experienced knee problems, and was diagnosed with bilateral patellofemoral pain syndrome for which she was treated with medication, physical therapy and placed on 
several physical profiles.  After three months of therapy she continued to experience knee pain, which rendered her unfit for continued military service.  She was discharged with disability separation pay.  Although, the applicant is doing well now, it does not exclude the possibility of recurrence of her knee pain if she is returned to the rigors of a military environment.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

_________________________________________________________________

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 Docket Number BC-2003-01952 in Executive Session on 13 January 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36‑2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 28 May 03, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, dated 
               29 Oct 03.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Nov 03.