RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2017-00764

	COUNSEL: NONE

	HEARING: NO

APPLICANT’S REQUEST.  He receive a medical instead of a general (under honorable conditions) discharge.

APPLICANT’S CONTENTION.  He had surgery while on active duty, never went through physical therapy nor did he get a knee brace.  He did not go through a medical board before being discharged even though he was still under a physician’s care.  The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS.  The applicant is a former Missile & Space System Electronic Maintenance Apprentice Basic Airman. 

On 9 Apr 02, the applicant received a Letter of Reprimand for disruption in a classroom setting by making inappropriate gestures and crude comments in the presence of mixed company.

On 7 May 02, the applicant received an Article 15 for unlawful entry into another airman’s room and willfully damaging government property.

On 7 Aug 02, the applicant received an Article 15 for wrongfully inhaling a toxic substance on 24 Jul 02 and for failure to remain out of civilian attire while outside his dorm room during Phase 1 training on 27 Jul 02.

On 16 Sep 02, the applicant received an off work recommendation, for a six week duration, requested by Vandenberg Air Force Base Clinic due to knee surgery that was performed on 11 Sep 02.

On 23 Sep 02, the applicant was notified of his administrative discharge for drug abuse and minor disciplinary infractions.

On 18 Oct 02, the applicant was given a medically qualified for separation notice from 30 MDOS/SGOMF.

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

AIR FORCE EVALUATION.  AFPC/DP2STM recommends denying the application. There is an error with the separation program designator (SPD) code and corresponding narrative reason for separation currently on the applicant’s DD Form 214.  The applicant’s record indicates that the discharge authority directed that “Drug Abuse” be the primary basis for discharge. The narrative reason listed on the DD Form 214 should reflect “Drug Abuse” and the corresponding SPD code should reflect “JKK”. Our office can make the correction as necessary when the board concludes its review, however, it should be noted that this would be of no added benefit to the applicant. Furthermore, the applicant has not filed a timely petition and it has been almost 15 years since the applicant’s discharge.  The complete AFPC/DP2STM advisory is at Exhibit C.

The BCMR IMA Medical Advisor recommends denying the application. There is no documentation that the knee injury or subsequent surgery represented a cause for service termination due to unfitness.  In addition, there is no other supporting medical documentation consistent with a knee injury of such severity that it would have presented the basis for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). The complete BCMR IMA Medical Advisor advisory is at Exhibit D.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION.  The Board sent a copy of the Air Force evaluation to the applicant on 24 Jan 18 for comment (Exhibit E), but has received no response.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES:

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 AFPC/DP2STM and the BCMR IMA 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 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 record.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS:  The APPLICANT be informed that the application was not timely filed; that it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the delay; and the application will only be reconsidered upon receipt of relevant evidence not already considered by the Board.

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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2017-00764 in Executive Session on 11 Apr 18:

Panel Chair
Panel Member
Panel Member

The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A: Applicant’s application, DD Form 149, dated 4 Jan 17.
Exhibit B: Documentary evidence, including excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C: Advisory opinion, AFPC/DP2STM, dated 17 Oct 17.
Exhibit D: Advisory opinion, BCMR IMA Medical Advisor, dated 17 Jan 18.
Exhibit E: Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBR to applicant, dated 24 Jan 18.

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