RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02834 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His entry-level separation (ELS) with uncharacterized service be changed to a honorable medical discharge. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: While attending Officer Training School (OTS) he incurred an injury to his hip. His physician told him his hip injury was permanent with a five percent disability. He was subjected to hazing, intimidation and mistreatment by his roommate and OTS training officia1s. Although, he had orders for bed rest and no physical activity he was not allowed recuperate. He was forced to continue to participate in physical activity. He was medically discharged by his physician due to his hip injury. He applied to the Department of Veterans Affairs for health coverage and a home loan but was denied because he could not prove that he incurred an injury while on active duty. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 6 Jul 99. On 9 Jul 99, the applicant participated in his first physical fitness test (PFT) and received a score of 65. The passing minimum score was 180. He failed to meet the minimum standards for push-ups, sit-ups and the 600 yard run. The applicant was counseled regarding his PFT failure and in response he stated that the physical fitness levels required before entering OTS was not fully explained and he worked as hard as his body could physically work for that test. On 19 Jul 99, the applicant reported for a follow up appointment for hip problems which was hindering his training. His physician recommended he be medically disenrolled due to bilateral hip inflammation. By Memorandum for Record (MFR) dated 21 Jul 99, the applicant was informed he could request reinstatement in OTS upon confirmation by a competent medical authority that the medical reason for his disenrollment has been resolved. The MFR further noted the applicant believed there were inconsistencies in training and treatment between different people and flights. Lastly, the MFR noted the applicant was prohibited from participating in aerobics, PC games, PFTs, the LRC, or inspections until a decision on the disenrollment was made. On 21 Jul 99, the applicant acknowledged the MFR and elected to not provide a written statement. On 22 Jul 99, the applicant was administratively disenrolled from OTS due to a medical condition (bilateral hip inflammation) which required an extended recovery period. The applicant’s administrative disenrollment for medical reason was approved by the commander on 23 Jul 99, with a recommendation for reinstatement in the course and technical training at a later date. On 23 Jul 99, the applicant requested to be separated based on his elimination from OTS. The applicant elected not to remain on active duty as an enlisted member. He was furnished an entry level separation, with uncharacterized service characterization, and was credited with 18 days of active service. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Holm Center/CAG/CCX recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. The applicant was removed from training with an option to return to duty once he recovered from his injury. However, the applicant in his application for separation elected to not remain in the service. Furthermore, he has submitted his appeal 14 years after the incident and as a result there are no remaining individuals at OTS with first-hand knowledge of the case or records to substantiate the applicant’s claim. A complete copy of the Holm Center/CAG/CCX evaluation is at Exhibit C. The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. The Medical Consultant notes the applicant’s medical records were not available for review, however, information obtained for this evaluation was obtained from his disenrollment package which is presumed to be factual. The applicant was presumed fit at the time he entered active duty, although the documentation provided indicates he performed some form of strenuous fitness training prior to arriving at OTS and/or possibly after his military entrance processing station (MEPS) physical assessment. However, the Medical Consultant notes some Basic Military Training recruits commonly experience injuries, such as knee and foot pain as a result of strenuous physical training after prolonged marching and running activities. Whether or not these type injuries result in permanent damage can only be determined on a case by case basis, backed up by thorough medical examinations. Furthermore, it was noted the applicant’s condition was “inflammatory” in nature or was due to “inflammation” in the hips. This is to be distinguished from avascular necrosis, a likely permanent impairment of the hip joint if not timely treated. The use of a loose diagnostic term as inflammation is not specific for a particular traumatic event, disease entity, or anatomic cause of pain, such as trochanteric bursitis. In any case, inflammation of a joint or body part is not expected to represent a permanent lifelong functional impairment; as likely validated in the applicant’s ex-wife’s statement that it took him almost six months to recover from his injury. Nevertheless, in the training environment rules are established to prevent warehousing individuals while waiting for the healing process to take place for a given injury. In the case under review, the applicant’s physician documented that his condition would require an extended recovery period. Consequently, he was discharged under authority of AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, which contains provisions restricting the character of service to uncharacterized; albeit with a recommendation to re-enter training when healed. The Medical Consultant is aware and sensitive to the fact that such a designation of the applicant’s character of service does not afford him the opportunity to receive certain benefits through the Department of Veterans Affairs; e.g., for conditions otherwise resulting in an honorable character of service or which were determined not to have existed prior to service. While the Medical Consultant is quite empathetic with the applicant’s dilemma, particularly if he has continued to experience symptoms “to this day,” as alleged by one of his parents, absent proper medical documentation, service or post-service, the Medical Consultant is compelled to avoid speculation or conjecture in making a determination in his favor. The Medical Consultant opines the applicant has not met the burden of proof of error or injustice that warrants the desired change of the record. A complete copy of the AFBCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 23 Jun 15, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). As of this date, no response has been received by this office. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD: After careful consideration of applicant’s request and the available evidence of record, we find the application untimely. The applicant did not file within three years after the alleged error or injustice was discovered as required by Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552 and Air Force Instruction 36-2603. The applicant has not shown a plausible reason for the delay in filing, and we are not persuaded that the record raises issues of error or injustice which require resolution on the merits. Thus, we cannot conclude it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to file in a timely manner. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The application was not timely filed and it would not be in the interest of justice to waive the untimeliness. It is the decision of the Board, therefore, to reject the application as untimely. The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-02834 in Executive Session on 12 Aug 15, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence pertaining AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-02834 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 5 Jun 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, Holm Center/CAG/CCX, dated 19 Apr 15, w/atchs. Exhibit D. AFBCMR Medical Consultant, dated 2 Jun 15. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Jun 15.