RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04495 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

______________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His narrative reason for separation be changed from “Failed 
Medical/Physical Procurement” to “Medical discharge.” 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He was discharged for a medical condition which is reflected in 
his records. 

 

The applicant provides no documents in support of his request. 

 

His complete submission is at Exhibit A. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 10 Nov 2003, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force. 

 

On 5 Dec 2003, the applicant was notified by his commander that 
he was recommending he be discharged from the Air Force for 
entry-level separation (Defective Enlistment). The commander 
cited medical narrative summary dated 1 Dec 2003 that found 
the applicant did not meet minimum medical standards to 
enlist. 

 

On 5 Dec 2003, the applicant acknowledged the Discharge 
Notification and waived his rights to consult with legal 
counsel and submit statements in his own behalf. 

 

On 8 Dec 2003, the Staff Judge Advocate found the discharge 
action legally sufficient. 

 

On 11 Dec 2003, the applicant received an entry level discharge 
with an uncharacterized character of service after serving one 
month and two days of active service. 

 


 

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this 
application, extracted from the applicant's military 
records, are contained in the letter prepared by the 
appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit D. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial of changing the applicant’s 
narrative reason for separation. DPSOS states the applicant 
did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or 
injustices that occurred in the discharge processing. He 
should not have been allowed to join the Air Force because of 
his medical condition (pes planus). Had the Air Force known 
of this condition at the time of his enlistment, he would not 
have been allowed entry into the military. The documentation 
on file in the master personnel records supports the basis for 
discharge and his entry level service characterization. The 
discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive 
requirements of the discharge instruction and was within the 
discretion of the discharge authority. 

 

Airmen are given entry-level separation/uncharacterized 
service characterization when separation is initiated in the 
first 180 days of continuous active service. The Department of 
Defense (DoD) determined if a member served less than 180 days 
continuous active service, it would be unfair to the member and 
the service to characterize their limited service. Therefore, 
his narrative reason for separation is correct and in 
accordance with DoD and Air Force instructions. 

 

The complete DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial. The Medical 
Consultant states it appears that the applicant had bilateral 
moderate pes planus, or flat feet, discovered at the Military 
Entrance Processing Station five months before entering 
military service, which had been asymptomatic until he 
experienced the levels of physical activity encountered in 
basic training. Symptoms developed within 30 days of entry 
into active service. Additionally, once at Basic Military 
Training, he was also diagnosed with hallux valgus (bunions). 
Both of these conditions, when symptomatic, are disqualifying 
for continued service, in accordance with AFI 48-123, Medical 
Examinations and Standards. Whenever a condition is found 
disqualifying for continued service, or even for entry into 
military service many people seek to have that condition waived 
so that their military service can continue. Medical records 
show that the applicant declined the opportunity to seek a 


waiver for this condition. Although the Department of Veterans 
Affairs (DVA) does rate illnesses and injuries if there is a 
service connection, the Air Force is prohibited by law from 
offering compensation for a medical condition that existed 
prior to service. The Medical Consultant concludes that the 
applicant has not met the burden of proof of an error or 
injustice that warrants the desired change of the record. 
There is also no suggestion that any error or injustice 
occurred during this process. 

 

The complete BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit D. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

On 24 Jul 2012, copies of the Air Force evaluations were 
forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 
30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this 
office (Exhibit E). 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

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. We took notice 
of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of 
the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation 
of the BCMR Medical Consultant and the Air Force office of 
primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis 
for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an 
error or injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to 
the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief 
sought in this application. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 Docket Number BC-
2011-04495 in Executive Session on 15 Nov 2012, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC-
2011-04495: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, 1 Nov 2011. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 7 Feb 2012. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 5 Jul 

 2012. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Jul 2012. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair