RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-02790

						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His entry-level separation with an uncharacterized service be changed to a medical retirement with a 30 percent disability rating.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He sustained an injury to his legs while in Basic Military Training that led to his entry-level separation.  He is still experiencing pain in his left hip.

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant entered the Regular Air Force on 25 Nov 13.

On 8 May 14, the applicant was notified by his commander of his intent to recommend he be discharged In Accordance With (IAW) AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, for erroneous enlistment.  The specific reason for the action was a medical Narrative Summary (NARSUM) dated 29 Apr 14 that found the applicant did not meet minimum medical standards to enlist.  He should not have been allowed to join the Air Force because of knee pain.

On 8 May 14, the applicant acknowledged the discharge notification and waived his right to consult counsel and submit statements in his own behalf.

On 12 May 14, the discharge authority approved the recommendation that the applicant be discharged.

On 13 May 14, the applicant was discharged with an Entry Level Separation (ELS)/uncharacterized character of service and a narrative reason for separation of “Discharge failed medical/physical procurement standards.”  He was credited with 5 months and 19 days of total active service.

On 8 Jul 15, the Board denied the applicant’s request to change his uncharacterized discharge to an honorable discharge.  The Board agreed with the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR) that the applicant’s discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge instruction, was within the discretion of the discharge authority, and there were no errors or injustices in the discharge process.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force OPR, which is attached at Exhibit C.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial indicating the applicant has not met the burden of proof of error or injustice that warrants the desired change of the record.  Insufficient medical evidence is supplied to refute the presumption of regularity in the applicant’s discharge action and resultant service characterization.  Without necessary objective evidence the Medical Consultant could not make the determination that the applicant’s case warranted a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB), followed by an unfit finding by a Physical Evaluation Board, and a medical retirement rated at 30 percent.

No objective evidence is supplied upon which to corroborate whether the applicant was erroneously or prematurely discharged without a MEB or placement on the Temporary Disability Retired List; as would be appropriate if his condition was considered service incurred, had not yet been stabilized, and rated at least 30 percent disabling.

Similarly, no service evidence is supplied depicting the diagnostic cause of the applicant’s knee pain, nor its impact upon his ability to perform his military duties.  However, it is implicit from the limited evidence that medical officials determined that the knee ailment either existed prior to service or the underlying cause of his pain existed prior to service, that it was not permanently aggravated by military service; and that it would further interfere with completion of training if retained.   Therefore, the Air Force followed its established policies for Entry-Level Separations, under AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen.

A complete copy of the BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 8 Dec 15 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D).  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.  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 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 of injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, 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-2015-02790 in Executive Session on 16 Aug 16 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

					 , Panel Chair
					 , Member
					   , Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-02790 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 23 Jun 15, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Available Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, BCMR Medical Consultant, 
  dated 19 Nov 15.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 8 Dec 15.

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.