RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBERS:  02-02637
            INDEX CODE 108.01  108.02
            COUNSEL:  None

            HEARING DESIRED:  Yes

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be given service connection and compensation for his flat feet, and
that his Medical History Report entrance exam,  dated  23 Apr  79,  be
corrected.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The Report of Examination is fraudulent on the part of  the  examining
physician, who clearly noted that he was not qualified for enlistment.
 He has been diagnosed with flat feet  and  heel  spurs.   He  endured
chronic pain throughout his military service. The overuse and repeated
pounding on hard surfaces while marching and standing  post  extremely
weakened his foot’s arch.  The  chronic  pain  limits  his  employment
opportunities. Prior to his enlistment, he  had  no  medical  problems
with  his  lower  extremities.  He  provides  a  26  Oct  00  podiatry
evaluation indicating he has flat feet and tight Achilles tendon  with
outward deviation of the foot.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is  at  Exhibit
A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Notations on the entrance exam indicate the  applicant  was  initially
rejected for being overweight; however,  on  repeat  weighing  he  was
found to be within weight standards and was accepted for entrance. His
foot examination was recorded as normal. He entered active duty on  23
May 79 and served as a security  policeman/specialist.  The  available
records do not reflect that he reported any history of  foot  pain  or
flat feet while he was on active duty in the Air Force.  After serving
his term of active obligated service, he was honorably released in the
grade of sergeant and transferred to the Air Force Reserve  on  22 May
83. He had 4 years of active duty. On  22  May  85  he  was  honorably
discharged from the Air Force Reserves.

According  to  Department  of  Veterans  Affairs  (DVA)  records,  the
applicant served in the US Army from 5 May 88 to 29 Jun 89. No further
details are available.

He first filed a claim for disability compensation with the DVA on  29
Aug 00. DVA records reflect the first mention of a knee condition  was
in a treatment report on 8 May 98  after  the  applicant  fell  off  a
ladder at work and injured his knee. A 9 Jan 00 treatment report noted
he had left knee pain since a  motor  vehicle  accident  three  months
previously.  A 6 Feb 01 DVA rating decision denied service  connection
for  flat  feet,  lower  extremity  condition,  knee  condition,  back
condition and depression as there was no record of a disability in the
military and no link between the military and the current disability.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The  AFBCMR  Medical  Consultant  provides   details   regarding   the
applicant’s medical situation. He asserts that there  are  no  entries
for foot pain or flat feet for the Air Force active duty  period.  The
Consultant further notes that service medical records for  the  period
the applicant was on active duty in the Army  (1988-1989)  contain  no
entries for foot pain except on his  Army  separation  physical  exam.
That Army exam, dated 21 Mar 89, documents his complaint  of  numbness
in his feet and lower back after standing for long  periods  of  time.
The physical exam documented normal strength without  muscle  atrophy,
intact reflexes, and negative tests for sciatic nerve root irritation.
His feet were annotated as normal on that exam. Review of the  medical
records finds no evidence that the applicant had difficulties with his
feet while in the Air Force. Further medical  documentation  from  the
Army five years later shows no evidence  of  significant  difficulties
from flat feet that would have justified disability discharge from the
Army. Therefore, denial is recommended.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

HQ AFPC/DPPD advises that an examination of  the  applicant’s  medical
records was accomplished just prior to his voluntary  separation.  The
review resulted in a decision that no  requirement  for  a  separation
physical exam was necessary. It is assumed from this action  that  the
medical authority felt no serious medical condition  existed  at  that
time which would have precluded  him  from  completing  his  obligated
service. Records clearly show he was reasonably capable of  performing
the duties of his office, grade, rank and rating right  up  until  the
time of his separation.  They agree with the AFCMR Medical  Consultant
and also recommend denial.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Complete copies of the Air Force evaluations  were  forwarded  to  the
applicant on 22 Nov 02 for review and comment within 30 days.   As  of
this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.    The applicant has exhausted all remedies  provided  by  existing
law or regulations.

2.    The application was not timely filed;  however,  it  is  in  the
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

3.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of error or injustice. After a thorough  review  of  the
evidence  of  record  and  the  applicant’s  submission,  we  are  not
persuaded that he should be compensated for flat feet or that  the  23
Apr 79 entrance exam should be altered.  The  applicant’s  contentions
are  duly  noted;  however,  we  do  not  find  these   uncorroborated
assertions, in and by themselves, sufficiently persuasive to  override
the evidence of record or the rationale provided by the AFBCMR Medical
Consultant and the Air Force. The applicant submits no  evidence  that
he had difficulties with his feet while in the Air Force or  that  the
service is culpable for his present  day  medical  problems.  Further,
after separating from the Air Force, he continued his military service
in the Army and apparently had no  medical  condition  that  warranted
disability discharge. We therefore adopt the  rationale  expressed  as
the basis for our decision that the applicant has  failed  to  sustain
his burden of having suffered either an error or an injustice. In view
of the above and  absent  persuasive  evidence  to  the  contrary,  we
conclude this appeal should be denied.

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  our  understanding  of  the  issue(s)   involved.
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.
_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of material error  or  injustice;  that  the
application was denied without a personal  appearance;  and  that  the
application will only be reconsidered upon  the  submission  of  newly
discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the  Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 20 February 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:

                  Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
                  Ms. Mary J. Johnson, Member
                  Mr. James A. Wolffe, Member

The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number 02-
02637 was considered:

  Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 30 Jul 02, w/atchs.
  Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
  Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, dated 17 Oct 02.
  Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPD, dated 19 Nov 02.
  Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 Nov 02.




                                   RICHARD A. PETERSON
                                   Panel Chair