RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2017-01814

	COUNSEL

	HEARING: YES

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His honorable discharge be changed to a medical retirement.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He chose to accept his discharge with regret.  His decision to leave the service was forced by his service related medical issues.  He desires a medical retirement in lieu of 15 years of Guard service.  The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is a former Air National Guard technical sergeant.
 
On 1 Nov 12, the applicant received an honorable character of service, under the provision of AFI 36-3209, paragraph 3.14, Physical Disqualification.  He served 12 years total for retired pay.

The DVA Rating Decision dated 7 Sep 17, reflects service connection for major depressive disorder, recurrent (claimed as Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)) was granted with an evaluation of 50 percent effective 22 May 16; Service connection for alcohol use disorder (claimed as alcohol abuse (related to PTSD - Non-Combat) was denied; Service connection for fatty liver disease echogenicity (claimed as liver condition) was denied; Service connection for hypertension (claimed as high blood pressure) was denied; Service connection for patellofemoral pain syndrome ( claimed as knee condition, right) was denied (Exhibit B).  

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

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The AFBCMR Medical Advisor recommends denying the application.  The applicant is appealing for a medical discharge for “service related medical issues.”  However, the specific disqualifying condition for which the applicant is claiming is not identified in the appeal.  AF Form 469, Duty Limiting Condition Report, dated 22 Aug 12 identifies duty and mobility restrictions and the applicant’s “Non-Duty” physical disqualification.  The objective basis for assessment of a potentially disqualifying medical condition (right knee pain) rest exclusively on the orthopedic assessment, which occurred on or around 18 Apr 12.  No other medical documentation was noted with respect to the applicant’s appeal.  In addition, there is no documentation of a Fitness for Duty examination as recommended on 5 Aug 12.  Although the diagnosis of patellofemoral arthritis is listed by the orthopedist, clinical notes also indicate this condition is sometimes self-limiting without significant physical limitations.  More importantly, there is no supporting medical evidence that the condition was service connected, in line of duty or permanently aggravated by military service. Furthermore, in order to qualify for a medical retirement, an unfitting medical condition must be service connected, in line of duty and would be so severe as to represent the cause of service termination.  The preponderance of medical evidence strongly suggest that the knee condition was not in line of duty or permanently aggravated by military service.  This finding is consistent with the Department of Veteran Affairs Rating Decision dated 7 Sep 17.  DoDI 1332.18, paragraph 3.14.7. states, “Prior to the execution of a discharge for physical disqualification for a non-duty related impairment or condition the member shall be afforded the opportunity to enter the DES for a determination of fitness.”  In contrast, a medical retirement for a non-duty related condition, not incurred in line of duty or non-service connected, not caused or permanently aggravated by military service is not medically supported by the medical evidence provided and there exist no error or injustice in the reason for separation.  

The Department of Veteran Affairs Rating Decision dated 7 Sep 17, assigned a denial for service connection for patellofemoral pain syndrome of the right knee.  The decision states, “…The evidence does not show an event, disease or injury in service.  There is no evidence that the condition occurred in the line of duty to establish service connection.  No link was found between his medical condition and military service.  Service connection for patellofemoral pain syndrome (claimed as knee condition, right) is denied since this condition neither occurred in nor was caused by service.”  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 10 May 18 for comment (Exhibit D) and the applicant replied on 7 Jun 18.  In his response, the applicant states to train and run in combat boots without the proper orthopedic soles lead to many injuries amongst the troops. He lived by intestinal fortitude and he was always driven & pressured to suck it up and drive on.  As it relates to the events of 2012, it was driven and caused after the incompletion and reaggravation of his knee during his PT test on the loose pea gravel/oval track. Within his discharge packet in 2012, he received a letter that listed the conditions and benefits in which he could have been entitled.  Since he did not have or meet 15 years of service or more, it was noted that he would not be given a medical retirement, but it also noted if he had 15 years of service, he would have qualified for a medical retirement.  He is currently under appeal with the VA as of Sep 17, and he believes his initial decision will be overturned and he will receive the appropriate rating for his right knee.  He further states that he was evaluated by the VA and considered for PTSD for events that transpired in 1997 and 2005, and this should be considered towards his evaluation.   The applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit E.

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 and injustice.  The Board concurs with the rationale and recommendation of the AFBCMR Medical Advisor and find that a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions.  Therefore, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s records.

4.  The applicant’s case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to the Board’s understanding of the issues involved.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The applicant be informed the evidence did not demonstrate material error or injustice, 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 Docket Number BC-2017-01814 in Executive Session on 27 Jun 18:

All members voted not to correct the record.  The panel considered the following:

            Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 30 Mar 17.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Advisory opinion, AFBCMR Medical Advisor, dated 26 Mar 18.
Exhibit D:	Notification of Advisory, AFBCMR to applicant, dated 10 May 18.
Exhibit E:  Letter, Applicant, atchs, dated 7 Jun 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 pertaining to Docket Number BC-2017-01814.