RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2017-00415

	COUNSEL: NONE

	HEARING: NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He receive a medical retirement versus being separated.  Applicant states that due to his 40 percent Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) determination, that he should have been medically discharged.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Due to his 40 percent DVA determination, he should have been medically discharged.  He was forced to separate due to his disability and also requests that his right thumb be considered for disability purposes that occurred while serving.  His request includes back pay compensation as well as retiree benefits.  The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is a separated Air Force staff sergeant. 

On 5 Dec 00, applicant received an honorable discharge from the Air Force for completion of active service.

On 12 Jan 01, applicant reenlisted into the Air Force reserves for six years.

On 17 Jan 07, applicant was relieved from his assignment HQ ARPC and honorably discharged from the Air Force Reserve with an effective date of 11 Jan 07.

On 12 Jun 17, applicant received a continuation of his previous 10 percent disability rating from the DVA for the evaluation of his left ankle. 

For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B and the advisory at Exhibit C.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Advisor recommends denying the application.  DoDI 1332.38, entitled Adequate Performance Until Referral, addressing the timing of referral for disability evaluation, which reads, “If the evidence establishes that the Service member adequately performed his or her duties until the time the Service member was referred for physical evaluation, the member may be considered fit for duty even though medical evidence indicates questionable physical ability to continue to perform duty.“  The supplied performance reports showed no evidence of degradation in duty performance due to a medical condition.  Absent evidence of one or more duty and mobility restricting condition that prevented the applicant from reasonably performing the duties of his office, grade, rank, or rating, the BCMR Medical Advisor recommends denial.  The complete advisory is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Board sent a copy of the Air Force evaluation to the applicant on 30 Nov 17 for comment (Exhibit D), but has received no response.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The application was not timely filed.

2.  The applicant exhausted all available avenues of non-judicial relief before applying to the Board.

3.   After thoroughly reviewing all Exhibits, it is the Board’s opinion that the applicant is not the victim of an error or injustice.  The Board concurs with the rationale and recommendation of the BCMR Medical Advisor and finds that a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions.  The Board also notes 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, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR).  Moreover, the applicant has offered no plausible reason for the delay in filing the application.  The Board finds the application untimely and concludes it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the delay.  Therefore, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s records.

CERTIFICATION:

The following quorum of the Board, as defined in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), paragraph 1.5, considered Docket Number BC-2017-00415 in Executive Session on 25 Apr 18:

Panel Chair
Panel Member
Panel Member

The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, dated 3 Jan 17.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Advisory opinion, BCMR Medical Advisor, signed 30 Nov 17.
Exhibit D:	Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 30 Nov 17.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.