RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2018-00244

XXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL: NONE
	
	HEARING REQUESTED: YES

APPLICANT’S REQUEST

Her Entry-Level Separation (ELS) be changed to a medical discharge.

APPLICANT’S CONTENTIONS

The Medical Board Report states a physical disability existed prior to service.  However, she did not have a medical condition of Pes Valgoplanus prior to entering the Air Force.  She entered the Army in 1995 with a medical waiver for her ankle.  She had issues with her knees and lower back, but no orthopedic specialist ever diagnosed her with Pes Valgoplanus. 

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

On 27 Oct 87, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force in the grade of airman basic (E-1).

Per AF Form 618, Medical Board Report, dated 12 Nov 87, the applicant was diagnosed with right ankle pain secondary to prior injury, Pes Valgoplanus.  The board recommended, “Discharge from service by reason of physical disability which existed prior to service (EPTS) and has not been aggravated permanently thereby.”

On 13 Nov 87, the applicant’s commander notified her he was recommending she be discharged from the Air Force due to her not meeting the standards to join the Air Force because of right ankle pain, or Pes Valgoplanus, and her discharge would be described as an entry level separation.  

On 13 Nov 87, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the discharge notification, waived her right to consult with counsel and submit statements in her own behalf.  She also acknowledged that she understood this action could result in her discharge from the Air Force with an entry-level separation.

On 18 Nov 87, the applicant received an entry-level separation with an uncharacterized character of service.  Her narrative reason for separation is “Failed to Meet Physical Standards for Enlistment” with the corresponding separation code of J38.  She was credited with 22 days of active service.

Per DD Form 4/1, Enlistment/Reenlistment Document, Armed Forces of the United States, provided by the applicant, on 15 Mar 95, she enlisted in the Army for four years. 

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

AIR FORCE EVALUATION

The AFBCMR Medical Advisor opines the burden of proof has not been met to warrant the desired change of the record.  It was the applicant’s recalcitrant ankle pain, a residual from her July 1987 EPTS injury, and not her asymptomatic pes planus, recorded on her 1987 Military Entrance Processing Station (MEPS) examination, that resulted in her discharge.  Stated differently, even if there was no evidence of or reference to pes planus or planovalgus, the applicant would have been discharged for the EPTS ankle injury; which medical officials determined, in certain words, was not permanently aggravated by her period military service.  It was also noted at the time of the applicant’s 1994 MEPS examination, there were no records regarding prior ankle injury.  The fact that the applicant was later accepted into the Army does not negate the validity or legitimacy of the discharge she received from the Air Force in 1987.
  
The complete advisory opinion is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION

The Board sent a copy of the advisory opinion to the applicant on 16 Jan 20 for comment (Exhibit D), and the applicant replied on 9 Feb 20.  In her response, the applicant contends numerous discrepancies in her medical reports versus the MRB Medical Advisory.  She received an ELS for ankle injury during Basic Training.  Per Medical Board Report dated 12 Nov 87, she was placed on temporary restrictions until 12 Nov 88, yet she was discharged 13 Nov 87.  Per MEPS report dated 24 Feb 87, right sprained ankle was "NOW HEALED."  Further, she has a normal arch and cannot have Pes Valgoplanus or any cortical defect.  She believes her separation was miscategorized.  The injury was sustained during Basic Military Training (BMT) and did not exist prior to service.  A medical discharge due to right ankle injury during BMT was warranted.

The applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit E.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION

1.  The application was not timely filed.

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

3.  After reviewing all Exhibits, the Board concludes the applicant is not the victim of an error or injustice.  The Board concurs with the rationale and recommendation of AFBCMR Medical Advisor and finds 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 of  the alleged error or injustice, as required by Section 1552 of Title 10, United States Code, and Air Force Instruction 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR).  While the applicant asserts a date of discovery within the three-year limit, the Board does not find the assertion supported by a preponderance of the evidence.  The Board does not find it in the interest of justice to waive the three-year filing requirement.  Therefore, the Board finds the application untimely and recommends against correcting the applicant’s records.

4.  The applicant has not shown a personal appearance, with or without counsel, would materially add to the Board’s understanding of the issues involved.

RECOMMENDATION

The Board recommends informing the applicant the application was not timely filed; it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the delay; and the Board will reconsider the application only upon receipt of relevant evidence not already presented.

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-2018-00244 in Executive Session on 14 Oct 20:

, Panel Chair
, Panel Member
, Panel Member

All members voted against correcting the record.  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 13 Jan 18.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Advisory opinion, AFBCMR Medical Advisor, dated 15 Jan 20.
Exhibit D:	Notification of advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 16 Jan 20.
Exhibit E:	Applicant’s response, dated 9 Feb 20.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings pertaining to Docket Number BC-2018-00244, as required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.