RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02101 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. His uncharacterized service be changed to medical. 2. His reason for separation (Failed Medical/Physical Procurement Standards) along with the corresponding Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of “JFW” be changed to medical reasons. 3. His entry level separation be changed to a medical discharge. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was never offered a medical evaluation board (MEB) for a condition that started while in the service. He has been service-connected with a disability condition (Atrial Flutter) and was originally rated at 10 percent; however, he is now rated at zero percent by the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA). In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of extracts from his master personnel record (MPR) and his DVA rating decisional documents. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 20 Mar 03 for a period of four years. On 16 May 03, the squadron commander notified the applicant of discharge action for erroneous enlistment. The proposed action was based on a Standard Form 600, Chronological Record of Medical Care, which indicated the applicant should not have been able to join the Air Force because of atrial fibrillation (irregular heartbeat) and it was determined the condition did not meet the medical standards to enlist. The commander recommended an entry level separation. On that same date, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the discharge notification, waived his right to consult counsel and to submit statements in his own behalf. The Deputy Chief, Military Justice, found the case file legally sufficient to support separation. On 19 May 03, the discharge authority approved the entry level separation. The applicant received an uncharacterized entry-level separation on 21 May 03, by reason of “Failed Medical/Physical Procurement Standards,” and was issued an RE code of 4C (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, or void enlistments). He was credited with two months and two days of active duty service. ________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AETC/SGPS recommends denial, stating, in part, that based on the findings at the time of separation, the separation action was in accordance with established policy and administrative procedures. In addition, they noted that since the applicant does not meet the medical criteria for military duty, they do not support a change to the applicant’s DD Form 214. They also noted that during his second week of training he was having shortness of breath and palpations; was seen by a provider and placed on medication for control; returned to the hospital three hours later with recurring symptoms and was admitted. He was treated with cardioversion and discharged four days later with good results. Medical notes indicate he and his family talked with medical board personnel concerning the options of separation vs. a medical board. Since the condition was discovered within 180 days of enlistment and is disqualifying for military duty, he was processed for an entry level separation. He was informed of the diagnoses and treatment plan. It was felt that this condition was not caused by military service, but existed prior to service and was aggravated by the intense physical activity, and he was unable to continue training. A condition must be considered service connected and/or the member must have served 180 days or more of active duty to be considered for future VA disability benefits. The complete AETC/SGPS evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial. They note that based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. In addition, the applicant’s record reveals that his condition was not caused by military service, but existed prior to service and was aggravated by the intense physical activity, and he was unable to continue his training. The applicant should not have been allowed to join the Air Force because of atrial fibrillation. Had the Air Force known of this condition at the time of applicant's enlistment, he would not have been allowed entry into the military. Although he states his condition did not exist prior to enlistment, his medical condition does not meet assessment standards. The applicant’s service characterization is correct as reflected on his DD Form 214. Airmen are given 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 that if a member served less than 180 days of continuous service, it would be unfair to the member and the service to characterize their limited service. Therefore, his uncharacterized service is correct and is in accordance with DoD and Air Force instructions. The complete AFPC/DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 9 Dec 11 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit E). ________________________________________________________________ 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 and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion in this application. The discharge appears to comply with the governing AFI and we find no evidence to indicate that his separation, his reason for separation, or his character of service from the Air Force were inappropriate. We find no evidence of error in this case and after thoroughly reviewing the documentation that has been submitted in support of applicant's appeal, we do not believe he has suffered from an injustice. Therefore, based on the available evidence of record, we find no basis upon which to favorably consider this application. 4. Notwithstanding the above, in regard to the applicant’s request to change his character of service to medical, DPSOS has provided an adequate assessment of the applicant’s case and we are in agreement with their opinion and recommendation. In addition, when a member is within a 180 days of service we in most cases do not characterize his short service. Only on a case by case basis and it is clearly warranted by unusual circumstances of personal conduct and performance of military duty, can a member be given an honorable characterization of service. Therefore, we find no basis to favorably consider this portion of his 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-2011-02101 in Executive Session on 20 March 2012, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 May 11, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AETS/SGPS, dated 15 Aug 11. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 8 Nov 11. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Dec 11.