RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2020-00326

	COUNSEL:  NONE

	HEARING REQUESTED:  NO

APPLICANT’S REQUEST

His records be corrected to reflect a medical discharge instead of an honorable discharge.

APPLICANT’S CONTENTIONS

He should have received a medical discharge for injuries he incurred while on active duty.  While on active duty, he was given a pair of shoes that did not fit properly which caused damage to his feet, particularly his left foot, in which the arch broke down.  This injury has caused him pain and made it impossible for him to walk or get around.  He is receiving disability benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) for a service-connected injury.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant is an honorably discharged Air Force airman basic (E-1).

The Standard Form (SF) 93, Report of Medical History, dated 17 May 80, reflects the applicant marked “No” for foot problems.

On 10 Jul 80, the applicant enlisted in the Air Force.

The SF 600, Chronological Record of Medical Care, dated 17 Jul 80, reflects the applicant presented on the fifth day of training requested and received arch supports.  Another entry dated 28 Jul 80, noted the foot strain persists, supports no benefit.  He saw a civilian doctor due to his tired and hurting feet.  The entry further noted he only wore tennis shoes and that his feet have hurt since his arrival here, despite a waiver.  His feet keeps him awake at night and it hurts to stand.  He was diagnosed with pes valgoplanus (flat feet) that existed prior to service (EPTS), and recommended separation.

The SF 502, Narrative Summary, dated 28 Jul 80, reflects the applicant has had foot problems since age 6.  He had difficulty in high school gym and had to run barefooted.  The summary also noted the applicant concealed all this information at AFEES (Armed Forces Entrance Examination Station), which the physician classified his feet as pes planus 2nd degree, and that he concealed symptomatology and was accepted.  The summary determined the applicant’s medical condition existed prior to entry into service and has not been aggravated by service beyond the normal progression of the disease.”

On 1 Aug 80, the applicant underwent a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) for pes valgoplanus.  It was noted the applicant was unable to perform duty requiring prolonged marching, standing, or heavy lifting, and therefore did not meet minimum enlistment standards.

The applicant’s commander recommended him for discharge for erroneous enlistment under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Chapter 3, paragraph 3-8g.  The reason for the discharge action was an MEB found the applicant did not meet the minimum medical standards for enlistment due to pes valgoplanus.  The applicant acknowledge receipt of the notification for discharge.  

On 23 Aug 80, the applicant was discharged with an honorable character of service, and a narrative reason for separation of Failed to Meet Physical Standards for Enlistment.  

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.  There is no evidence of an error or an injustice.  The applicant was separated due to a pre-existing foot condition, for which he failed to disclose at his enlistment.

The applicant was accepted into military service with a disqualifying medical condition, implicitly with a waiver.  However, collectively given, (a) the report of foot problems at age 6, (b) the difficulty in high school gym, (c) the positive examination findings at AFEES, and (d) the recurrence of symptoms so soon after entering training, the Medical Advisor could not refute the determination made by medical officials present at the snapshot time of service in 1980, that the applicant’s congenital foot ailment was not permanently aggravated by military service and his symptoms represented an expected clinical manifestation or natural progression of his congenital foot ailment. Therefore, the applicant was not eligible for processing of his condition as a compensable medical discharge under, then, AFR 35-4, Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, and Separation.

Furthermore, while the applicant may have received service-connection and compensation for one or more medical conditions by the DVA, and that his foot condition may have progressed over time.  The DVA operates under the provisions of Title 38, United States Code, which authorizes the DVA to offer compensation for any medical condition that it finds service-connected, without regard to its relationship with a service member’s retainability or fitness to serve, narrative reason for separation, or years transpired since date of separation.  The DVA may also conduct periodic evaluations for adjusting disability ratings, as the level of impairment from a given medical condition may vary (improve or worsen) over the lifetime of the veteran.

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 29 May 20 for comment (Exhibit D), but has received no response.

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 the 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 discovering 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.

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-2020-00326 in Executive Session on 17 Jun 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 15 Oct 19.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Advisory opinion, AFBCMR Medical Advisory, dated 4 May 20.
Exhibit D:	Notification of advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 29 May 20.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings related to Docket Number BC-2020-00326, as required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.