RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03724 COUNSEL:	NONE
HEARING DESIRED:	NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His	entry	level	separation	be	changed	to	medical,	and	his discharge be considered honorable.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He has a service related injury, evidenced by the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) award of 20% compensation rating.

The	applicant’s	complete	submission,	with	attachments,	is	at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 30 Jul 13, the applicant entered the Regular Air Force.
On 27 Sep 13, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was recommending him for discharge for Erroneous Enlistment.

On 27 Sep 13, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge, and waived his rights to consult, Area Defense Counsel, and did not submit statements on his own behalf.

On 1 Oct 13, the discharge authority approved the separation and directed the applicant be separated with an Entry-level (Uncharacterized) discharge.

On 3 Oct 13, the applicant was furnished an entry level separation for discharged failed medical/physical procurement standards, with uncharacterized character of service, and was credited with two months and four days of active service.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memoranda prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibits C, D, and E.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice with regards to the applicant’s Separation Program Designator (SPD) code, narrative reason for separation, and characterization of service. The applicant was separated under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen (Erroneous Enlistment) with an uncharacterized discharge (entry level). The applicant’s commander recommended he receive an entry-level separation based on the medical narrative summary that found the applicant ineligible to meet the minimum medical standards to enlist in the United States Air Force; he should not have been allowed to join the Air Force because of being diagnosed with patellofemoral syndrome. If the relevant facts of this medical condition had been made known to the Air Force, he would have not been permitted to join. Both the commander and the discharge authority correctly concluded that discharge was in order. Since applicant was only on active duty for 59 days when the discharge action was initiated, he must be separated with an entry level discharge.

The applicant’s service characterization is also correct as reflected on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. Airmen are given Entry-level separation/Uncharacterized service characterization when separation is initiated in the first 180 days continuous active service. The Department of Defense (DoD) determined if a member served less than 180 days continuous active service, it would be unfair to the member and the service to characterize their limited service. Therefore, the Uncharacterized character of service on the DD Form 214 is correct and in accordance with DoD and Air Force instructions.

It is recommended the Board deny the applicant’s request. Based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge to include the SPD code, narrative reason for separation and character of service was appropriately administered and within the discretion of the discharge authority. Further, the applicant did not provide any evidence that an error or injustice occurred in the discharge processing.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C.
AETC/SGPS recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice with regards to the medical aspects of the process related to his separation. After a review of the records provided and medical notes from Wilford Hall Medical Center, it appears the strenuous physical activity of Basic Military Training aggravated the condition to the point he could not continue with training. On 16 Sep 13 the applicant was seen at the clinic and was diagnosed with Patella Femoral Syndrome (PFS), a condition that is disqualifying for military service. He stated  he understood the diagnoses and treatment plan and subsequently he

was processed for an entry level separation. After separation, he applied for and was awarded a disability rating by the DVA and he feels that makes his condition service connected. It was a precondition aggravated by strenuous physical activity, but was not caused by the training.

It is recommended the Board deny the applicant’s request because his condition may become asymptomatic with rest and mild activity, but the underlying defect remains and can become symptomatic with increased activity and is disqualifying for military service. Further, the applicant did not provide any evidence that an error or injustice occurred in the processing of his discharge.

A complete copy of the AETC/SGPS evaluation is at Exhibit D.
In contrast, the AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends granting relief, indicating there is evidence of an error or an injustice. While the DVA uses the 50/50% probability standard [“as least as likely as not”] in assigning service connection, the Military Departments must establish “clear and unmistakable evidence” that a medical condition existed prior to service. The Medical Consultant acknowledges the applicant may have had an anatomic predisposition for developing PFS, but could not determine through clear and unmistakable evidence there was not an acceleration or progression of the applicant’s right knee condition, despite the fact that he had been restricted in performing aggravating activities. Considering the probative value of the examination by the DVA, the reported increasing intensity and duration of right knee pain, the absence of grinding in the left knee, the Medical Consultant recommends rendering the benefit of doubt in the applicant’s favor. By establishing a nexus with military service, the applicant would have been eligible for Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) processing, following which a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) would have found him unfit and discharged him with an Honorable character of service, under provisions of AFI 36-3212, Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, and Separation. Because of his short period of service he would unlikely have been entitled to severance pay.

The Medical Consultant recommends amending the record to reflect that he was discharged with an Honorable character of service, under Authority of AFI 36-3212, by reason of disability.

A complete copy of the SAF/MRBR evaluation is at Exhibit E.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to  the applicant on 6 Apr 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.	Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s complete submission, we believe the applicant is the victim of an error or injustice. While we note the comments of AFPC/DPSOR and AETC/SGPS indicating that relief should be denied because the applicant’s records contain no documentation substantiating the applicant’s contention his entry level discharge should be changed to a medical discharge, with honorable character of service, we believe a preponderance of the evidence substantiates that corrective action is warranted. In this respect, we concur with the opinion of the AFBCMR Medical Consultant that it could not be established through clear and unmistakable evidence that the applicant’s medical condition existed prior to service without permanent service aggravation and, thus, he should have had an opportunity to be processed under an MEB and PEB, where it is presumed, if found unfit, his discharge would be for disability under Authority of AFI 36-3212, and he would have been eligible for an honorable characterization of his service. Therefore, we recommend the applicant’s records be corrected as indicated below.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating  to  the  APPLICANT  be  corrected  to  show  that  on
3 October, 2013, the applicant was issued a narrative reason for separation of disability-other, a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of JFR, a separation authority of AFI 36-3212, a Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of 4K, and an honorable character of service.

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-03724 in Executive Session on 30 Jun 15 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member

All members voted to correct the records as recommended. The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-03724 was considered:

Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 15 Aug 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C.	Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 30 Sep 14. Exhibit D.	Memorandum, AETC/SGPS, dated 9 Oct 14 Exhibit E.	Memorandum, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Mar 15.
Exhibit D.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Apr 15.