RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-05208
 	
						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her Entry Level Separation (ELS), uncharacterized character of service be changed to a honorable discharge (ADMINISTRATIVELY CORRECTED).

On 11 October 2015, the applicant amended her request that her ELS be changed to a medical discharge.  

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She was discharged due to medical findings while at Basic Military Training (BMT).  An ELS is for someone who had issues prior to service.  She did not have any medical issues prior to her enlistment.

She never saw her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, until it was requested by her school.  She was told she would be medically boarded and honorably discharged.  

The Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) recommended her for an ELS.  A bone scan performed in 2006 found eight ailments but only one was used for her separation.  The bone scan determined the following: (1) left hip tendonitis, (2) anserine bursitis and tendonitis of the left knee, (3) tendonitis of the right knee, (4) mild stress change of mid foot (right foot), (5) mild stress changes of right ankle, (6) moderate stress changes of the left second metatarsal base, (7) stress changes of the left mid-foot and (8) mid stress changes of the left ankle.  However, the IPEB only used her condition of stress changes of the left mid-foot to determine her ELS.  She asks the decision of the IPEB be overturned and her discharge be changed to a medical discharge per all of her ailments documented in 2006.

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 15 August 2006, the applicant entered the Regular Air Force.

According to the AF Form 356, Findings and Recommended Disposition of USAF Physical Evaluation Board, dated 29 December 2006, the IPEB recommended the applicant be discharged under other than Chapter 61, 10 U.S.C. (EPTS) for unfitting conditions of mild stress changes left foot.

AF Form 1180, Action on Physical Evaluation Board Findings and Recommended Disposition, dated 4 January 2007, reflects the applicant concurred with the findings and recommendations of the IPEB.

On 5 January 2007, the Secretary of the Air Force directed the applicant be separated from active duty for physical disability due to a condition that EPTS.  

On 10 January 2007, the applicant was discharged with an ELS, uncharacterized character of service and a narrative reason for separation of “Disability Existed Prior to Service, PEB.”  The applicant served 4 months and 26 days of active duty service.

In a letter dated 15 September 2015, AFPC/DPSOR-214 provided the applicant with a new DD Form 214 which reflects her character of service as honorable.

In a letter dated 17 September 2015, SAF/MRBR advised the applicant her case was being administratively closed based on the administrative correction of her record by AFPC/DPSOR-214.

In a new DD Form 149, Application for Correction of Military Record, the applicant requested her ELS be changed to a medical discharge.  

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 Exhibits C, G and H.      

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPFD recommends the applicant’s DD Form 214 issued at the time of her release from active duty be amended to reflect “Discharge” in Item 23, Type of Separation, and “Honorable” in Item 24, Character of Service.

A review of the applicant’s disability case file indicates a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) was convened on 7 December 2006.  The MEB was referred to the IPEB which recommended discharge under other than Chapter 61, 10 U.S.C. for a condition that was EPTS.  The applicant concurred with the recommendation and subsequently she separated on 10 January 2007.  She served 4 months and 26 days of active duty service.  Per AFI 36-3212, Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement and Separation, dated 2 February 2006, members discharged for disability are honorably discharged.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPFD evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPFDD in an additional evaluation recommends denial of the applicant’s request.  There is no indication an error or injustice occurred during the processing of her disability case.  During a review of the documents provided, DPFD found the discharge under other than Chapter 61, 10 U.S.C. (EPTS) was in line with the policy and procedures in place in 2006.  As to ELS in block 23 of the DD Form 214, when applying AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, and AFI 36-3212, Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement and Separation, ELS is appropriate for members with 180 days or less service.

A complete copy of the revised AFPC/DPFDD evaluation is at Exhibit G.  

The IMA Medical Reviewer recommends denial of the applicant’s appeal for a change in the type of separation.  Under AFI 36-3212, Airmen are in ELS during the first 180 days of continuous active military service and may be separated without a service characterization.  In view of the facts available, there is insufficient medical justification to support an error or injustice occurred for a change in the characterization of the applicant’s discharge.  

The applicant was referred for a MEB after several medical and therapeutic interventions to relieve multiple complaints of knee, hip and ankle/foot pain which developed soon after entry in BMT.  There was no documented trauma or injury which preceded the applicant’s complaints.  While the Medical Reviewer concedes the applicant had multiple complaints during BMT, the persistent left foot and ankle pain were the most significant and consistent complaint and correlated more consistently with the clinical impressions from the bone scan test.

A MEB was convened on 7 December 2006 for the condition of mild stress changes to the left foot which was determined to have EPTS and not permanently aggravated by military service.  On 29 December 2006, an IPEB was held and concluded the mild stress changes in the left foot under VA disability code 5283 was unfitting and not compensable.  The IPEB noted the bone stress changes were due to deconditioning which EPTS.  On 4 January 2007, the applicant concurred with the IPEB’s findings and recommendations and was administratively separated on 10 January 2007.  

A complete copy of the BCMR IMA Medical Reviewer’s evaluation is at Exhibit H.  

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 6 June 2016 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit I).  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD:

Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice.  After a careful review of the applicant's contentions, documentation submitted in support of the request, and the available evidence of record, we are not convinced the applicant has provided sufficient evidence for us to conclude that she is the victim of an error or injustice.  We also note the applicant did not file the application within three years after the alleged error or injustice was discovered, or should have been discovered, as required by Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552 and Air Force Instruction 36-2603.  While the applicant claims a date of discovery of less than three years prior to receipt of the application, we believe a reasonable date of discovery was more than three years prior to receipt of the application.  Therefore, because we do not find it would be in the interest of justice to recommend granting relief, and the applicant has offered no plausible reason for the delay in filing the application, we cannot conclude it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file the application.  Accordingly, aside from the aforementioned administrative correction of her DD Form 214, we find the application untimely.

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-2014-05208 in Executive Session on 26 January 2017 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	 , Panel Chair
	 , Member
	 , Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-05208 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Forms 149, dated 16 December 2014 and 
  11 January 2015, w/ w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPFD, dated 29 January 2015.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOR-214, dated 15 September 2015,
			  w/atch.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 September 2015.
	Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 4 February 2016.
	Exhibit G.  Memorandum, DPFDD, dated 16 February 2016.
	Exhibit H.  Memorandum, BCMR IMA Medical Consultant,
			  Dated 29 March 2016.
	Exhibit I.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 6 June 2016.  

Pursuant to paragraph 1 of AFI 36-2603 (Title 32 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 865.1), it is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled matter.