RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02367 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Separation Code (SPD) of JFW (erroneous enlistment; medical condition disqualifying for military service, with no medical waiver approved) be changed to Permanent Physical Disability, with an honorable discharge instead of uncharacterized service. Her character of service of Uncharacterized be changed to honorable. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She did not have any issues with any part of her body until she entered Basic Military Training (BMT). Her discharge is misclassified and according to her Military Entrance Processing Station (MEPS) paperwork, she had no injuries or disabilities prior to joining the military. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 12 Sep 06. On 30 Nov 06, the applicant’s commander notified her of his intent to recommend her discharge for “defective enlistment,” under the provisions of AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-3208, Chapter 5, Section C, Paragraph 5.14 under the basis of Erroneous Enlistment. The reason for the action was that a medical narrative summary, dated 28 Nov 06, found the applicant did not meet the minimum medical standards to enlist. She should not have been allowed to join the Air Force because of pes planus. On 30 Nov 06, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the action and on her right to consult counsel and submit statements on her own behalf. The applicant waived her right to counsel and waived her right to submit statements on her own behalf. On 1 Dec 06, the discharge was found to be legally sufficient. On 5 Dec 06, the discharge authority concurred with the commander’s recommendation and directed the applicant’s entry- level separation. On 7 Dec 06, the applicant was furnished an entry-level separation with uncharacterized service and was credited with 2 months and 26 days of active service. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandums prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibit C, D, and E. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AETC/SGPS recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. The applicant feels her separation was unjust and in error based on the medical diagnoses. She felt that she was injured in BMT because she was cleared by the MEPS and noted to have normal arches with no foot pain. A review of the records and medical notes from Wilford Hall Medical Clinic (WHMC) note that during BMT the applicant developed chronic bilateral foot pain and was seen at Reid Clinic stating the pain began when she entered BMT. She was diagnosed with bilateral symptomatic Pes Planus. The condition isn’t caused, but is congenital and may not become apparent until, as in this case, aggravated by strenuous physical activity. The condition is disqualifying for military duty; therefore, the applicant was processed for an entry-level separation. A complete copy of the AETC/SGPS evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. The applicant is requesting her separation be changed to permanent physical disability because she believes that due to receiving disability compensation from The Department of Veteran Affairs (DVA) her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, is in error. The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of the discharge. The base legal office reviewed and found the it legally sufficient to support separation. The discharge authority approved the separation and directed the applicant be separated with an entry-level separation. The discharge was in accordance with the discharge regulation. The applicant’s service characterization is also correct as reflected on her DD Form 214. Airmen are given entry-level separation with uncharacterized service 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. The discharge, to include the separation program designator code (SPD), narrative reason for separation and character of service, was appropriately administered and within the discretion of the discharge authority. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit D. AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends granting partial relief by changing the applicant’s narrative reason for discharge to reflect disability, existed prior to service (EPTS)-service aggravated, under authority AFI 36-3212, a corresponding change in SPD code [JFK or WFK], and a change in character of service to Honorable. The applicant’s MEPS medical documents indicate no reported history of foot trouble prior to entering military service. An overprint medical entry completed by a military provider, dated 28 Nov 06, shows that the applicant was reportedly “asymptomatic” [without symptoms] until she entered BMT, that she was unaware that she had a diagnosis of pes planus, and that she had completed three weeks and two days of BMT. The provider noted “patient does not request an Air Education and Training Command (AETC) waiver, IAW AFI 48-123, Volume 2, paragraph A3.2.7.2,” and that she “saw orthopedics on 21 Nov 06 and Dx [diagnosed] with pes planus.” The applicant saw a podiatrist on 18 Dec 06, at which time she reported experiencing right and left foot pain and swelling, which had existed for three months. The pain was characterized as “constant and stabbing” and “made worse with running and walking.” The applicant reported the pain started “when she began military basic training” and that she was discharged during the last one and half weeks due to pain. A DVA rating document indicates the applicant was initially assigned a zero disability rating for her bilateral pes planus, but that it was upgraded to 30 percent effective 24 Aug 11. The DVA examiner commented: “The evaluation of your pes planus is increased effective the date we received your statement indicating worsening of your bilateral pes planus. The DVA is authorized to offer compensation for any medical condition determined service incurred, without regard to whether it interfered with performance of military service, narrative reason for release from military service nor the time transpired since leaving the service. The DVA is also authorized to periodically adjust [increase or decrease] disability rating awards as the level of severity of a given medical condition may vary [improve or worsen] over the lifetime of the veteran. It is scientifically difficult to now determine nearly a decade after discharge, whether the applicant’s painful foot condition, never resolved after cessation of military training and departure from the military service or whether it became symptomatic secondary to one or more post-service activities The Board is reminded that the Military Department bases it medical administrative determinations upon the evidence present at the “snapshot” time of final military disposition; and not based on future progression of disease or injury or post-service exacerbation of symptoms. The Military Department separated the applicant due to her pes planus, with the likely belief that it posed a risk for chronic recurrent exacerbations of foot pain with activity that would, in turn, continue to interfere with completion of training. The record indicates the applicant also declined an AETC waiver to continue to serve. The AFBCMR Medical Consultant is of the opinion that the foot pain experienced by the applicant incident to her participation in BMT is not automatically determinative that her pes planus had been permanently aggravated by military service; notwithstanding the fact that she was reportedly asymptomatic until her participation in BMT. The AFBCMR Medical Consultant could not determine through clear and unmistakable evidence, that the applicant’s medical condition [pes planus], which existed prior to service (EPTS), was not permanently aggravated by military service. Based upon the initial rating decision of the DVA and the Veterans Schedule for Rating Disabilities code, 5276, the Consultant opines the applicant’s foot condition would not have been rated greater than ten percent at the time of her release from military service. A complete copy of the AFBCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit E. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 11 Feb 15 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit F). 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 timely filed. 3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice to warrant corrective action. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of AETC/SG and AFPC/DPSOA, and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant is not the victim of an error or injustice. While we note the comments of the AFBCMR Medical Consultant indicating that the applicant’s condition could have been aggravated by her military service, we are not convinced by the evidence brought forth by the applicant is sufficient to undermine the presumption of regularity in government affairs that dictates that we must presume that the applicant’s discharge nearly ten years ago was appropriate to the given circumstances. In this respect, we note the applicant has brought forth a single page excerpt of a rating decision from 2011 where the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) saw fit to bestow disability benefits upon her for the condition in question. However, the DVA’s decision to do so is independent of the Air Force’s decision at the time of her discharge to find that her condition existed prior to service and was not aggravated by her military service. While we note the comments of the AFBCMR Medical Consultant indicating that he could not conclusively determine that the applicant’s EPTS medical condition was not permanently aggravated by military service, the presumption of regularity dictates that it is the applicant’s burden to substantiate that her condition was aggravated by her military service; it is not the government’s burden to substantiate that it was not. Therefore, irrespective of the DVA’s decision to bestow disability benefits upon the applicant, in the absence of evidence that the determination made by the medical professionals at the time of the applicant’s discharge was somehow erroneous, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief. 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-2014-02367 in Executive Session on 16 Apr 15, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence pertaining AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-02367 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 28 May 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, AETC/SGPA, dated 25 Jun 14. Exhibit D. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 30 Jun 14. Exhibit E. Memorandum, AFBCMR Med Conslt, dated 22 Jan 15. Exhibit F. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Feb 15.