RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00670 XXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. His rank at the time of his discharge be changed to Staff Sergeant (SSgt, E-5). 2. His administrative discharge be changed to a discharge with severance pay. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was unfairly demoted to the rank of Senior Airman (SrA, E-4) and denied reenlistment due to his Fitness Assessment (FA) failure. He was on an active medical profile for an injury he sustained during his deployment to Iraq, which precluded him from achieving a passing FA score. In support of his requests, the applicant provides a personal statement, copies of his AF Form IMT 348, Informal Line of Duty Determination (LOD); AF Form 422, Notification of Air Force Member’s Qualification Status; AF Form 469, Duty Limiting Condition Report; Reserve Order A-150, memorandums and various other documents associated with his requests. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: AFRC IMT 348 dated 17 May 2012, reflects that the applicant's left knee injury and resultant chronic knee pain, was found in the LOD. The investigative narrative states, “While member was deployed to Iraq in 2007/2008 he states that he was knocked to the ground by a mortar. He landed on his left knee and later complained of pain in the knee.” AF Form 422, initiated on 4 August 2012, shows the applicant was exempted from performing push-ups, sit-ups, one-mile walk, and the 1.5-mile run. The expiration date of the profile restrictions was 30 January 2013. AF Form 469, initiated on 4 August 2012, prohibited high impact activities with the legs; with an expiration date also established as 30 January 2013. The AF Form 469 does not indicate “mobility restrictions,” and no checkmark is placed in block “37” to depict a medical condition existed that required Medical Evaluation Board or Physical Evaluation Board processing. In a memorandum dated 17 June 2012, the applicant’s rater referred his Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) for the period 18 June 2010 through 17 June 2012. This referral EPR reflected the applicant's failure to meet minimum fitness standards. The memorandum gave the applicant the opportunity to rebut the report. According to Special Order A-31 dated 5 December 2012, the applicant was demoted from the grade of SSgt to SrA effective and with a date of rank of 5 December 2012. According to Reserve Order A-150, the applicant was honorably discharged from the Air Force Reserve effective 5 March 2013. The Air Force Military Personnel Data System reflects the applicant is ineligible to reenlist due to “Poor Fitness Score.” AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ARPC/A1K recommends denial of the applicant’s request that his rank at the time of his discharge be changed to SSgt. In accordance with the AFRC Field Instruction for AF Reserve Enlisted Promotion and Demotion Policy, demoted airmen must state their intention to appeal in writing. Members must submit the appeal to the servicing Military Personnel Section chief within 30 calendar days after acknowledging the final demotion decision, unless a delay from the initiating commander is authorized. There is no supporting documentation pertaining to this case that shows the applicant exercised his right to appeal the demotion once he was officially notified. In accordance with AFI 36-2612, United States Air Force Reserve Reenlistment and Retention Program, paragraph 3.8., members may appeal their nonselection of reenlistment through one of two options; appeal to the Senior Reserve Commander or to an Appeal Board. There is no supporting documentation pertaining to this case that shows the applicant exercised his right to appeal the nonselection of reenlistment. After a careful review of the documents presented and a conversation between an A1K staff member and the applicant via phone on 2 April 2014, it has been determined the applicant did not include documentation that shows he exercised his appeal rights regarding his demotion and denial of reenlistment action which ultimately resulted in his discharge from the Air Force Reserve. The complete A1K evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFRC/SG recommends denial of the applicant’s request to change his administrative discharge to a discharge with severance pay. The applicant links an injury he sustained in 2008 during a deployment in Iraq and his FA failures. The case file contains an informal LOD initiated on 18 October 2008 addressing a possible left meniscus tear [initially treated on 23 January 2008] due to the same injury while deployed. Review of the SG case file database shows that there are two LOD cases on file for the applicant. The first LOD determination was done in 2008 for a left knee injury, and found in the LOD. The second is for the same injury, identified as a meniscal tear, and completed at the wing level in 2012. These LOD cases are redundant, as nothing was accounted for in the second LOD determination that was not considered in the first. It is unclear why the wing prepared this case twice. There are two profiles provided by the applicant, which show that he had a profile restriction for high impact, but no duty restrictions. Additionally, there was no requirement for a medical board. Therefore, the applicant was returned to duty in 2008 after surgery and was able to perform his military duties. The complete SG evaluation is at Exhibit C. The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial of the applicant’s request to change his administrative discharge to a discharge with severance pay. In order to receive a medical discharge there must be a medical condition that precludes deployability and/or impedes the applicant from performing his military duties of the sufficient level of restriction, e.g., “L4T” profile, and duration, e.g., 12 months or more, to warrant processing through the Disability Evaluation System. Thus, the mere fact that the applicant was restricted from performing certain portions of his FA, does not automatically equate with an unfit finding via disability processing. While it is clear the applicant sought and received evaluations of his left knee in 2008, it is not clear if the condition precluded the performance of his military duties or required exemption from one or more portions of the FA for a continuous period of 12 months from between 2008 until 2012. The case file only contains the AF Form 422 initiated on 4 August 2012. Specifically, while it is presumed that the applicant had failed several FAs to bring into consideration an administrative discharge, no medical evidence is supplied to indicate that the applicant was exempted from at least one portion of the FA for a continuous 12 month period or throughout the period of failures; nor that he carried, or should have carried a Duty Limiting Condition Report designated as requiring MEB/PEB processing. Therefore, the Medical Consultant adopts the analysis and recommendation of the SG evaluation dated 16 May 2014. The complete Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit E. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 19 September 2014, copies of the Air Force and BCMR Medical Evaluations were forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit F). THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. 2. The application was timely filed. 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 the BCMR Medical Consultant and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our conclusion 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 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 this application in Executive Sessions on 12 February 2015, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR BC-2014- 00670 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 10 February 2014, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFRC/A1K, dated 7 April 2014. Exhibit D. Letter, AFRC/SG, dated 16 May 2014. Exhibit E. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 20 August 2014. Exhibit F. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 September 2014.