RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02171
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
The Narrative Reason for Separation of Failed to Meet Physical
Standards for Enlistment be removed from his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He passed all requirements. He was doing his duty as a road
guard, close to the third week of training, when he messed up
his right knee and was asked to go home.
In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of his
DD Form 214.
The applicants complete submission, with attachment, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant initially entered active duty on 29 Jul 80.
On 26 Aug 80, the applicants commander notified him that he was
recommending him for discharge for Erroneous Enlistment. The
reason for the action was that a medical evaluation board, which
convened on 20 Aug 80, found the applicant did not meet the
minimum medical standards to enlist because he had subluxation
of the patella with chondromalacia patella of both knees. The
condition existed prior to service and was not aggravated
permanently from his service.
On 27 Aug 80, the discharge authority directed the applicant be
discharged for Erroneous Enlistment and issued an Honorable
Discharge Certificate.
On 28 Aug 80, the applicant was discharged, issued an Honorable
Discharge Certificate with a Narrative Reason for Separation of
Failed to Meet Physical Standards for Enlistment and was
credited with one month of active service.
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are
described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of
primary responsibility which is included at Exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial of the applicants request,
indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice with
respect to his narrative reason for separation. The discharge
was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements
of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the
discharge authority. The medical board report, dated 20 Aug 80,
states the condition for which the applicant was separated
existed prior to the applicants enlistment and the condition
was not aggravated by training beyond the normal progression.
The applicant should not have been allowed to join the Air Force
because he had subluxation of the patella with chondromalacia
patella of both knees. Had the Air Force known of this
condition at the time of the applicants enlistment, he would
not have been allowed entry into the military. However, while
the applicants discharge for his failure to meet procurement
standards was consistent with the provisions of the governing
instruction, he was erroneously issued a separation program
designator (SPD) Code of JFU (positive urinalysis).
A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant on 26 Jul 12 for review and comment within 30 days.
As of this date, no response has been received by this office
(Exhibit D).
________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by
existing law or regulations.
2. The application was untimely 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 an error or injustice concerning
the applicants Narrative Reason for Separation upon discharge.
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 Air Force office of primary responsibility
and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the
applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice
concerning his separation. Notwithstanding the above, we note
that upon separation the applicant received an incorrect SPD
Code of JFU instead of JFC (Erroneous Enlistment), and that
his records will be corrected administratively by the OPR.
Therefore, in view of the above and in the absence of evidence
to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting any
relief beyond that rendered administratively.
4. The applicants 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 issues involved.
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably
considered.
________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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 AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2012-02171 in Executive Session on 29 Jan 13, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 May 13, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 29 Jun 12.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 Jul 12.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04510
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The Narrative Summary states her condition of patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS) was not present at the time of the medical history intake and physical examination and the doctor crossed out Existed Prior to Enlistment. She did not have knee problems prior to her enlistment. Therefore, someone at the Review Board Office must have agreed with her and the physician of record that her condition was...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02456
Shortly after entering basic military training, the applicant was diagnosed with a medical condition (Chondromalacia Patellae) that existed prior to service, which had it been detected at that time should have disqualified him for enlistment. In this respect, the discharge the servicemember received indicates an uncharacterized entry-level separation for serving less than six months of service which would be appropriate considering that the applicant served 56 days of active military...
In the alternative, his records be corrected to show he was retired because of physical disability with a compensable rating of 30% effective 8 Jul 97. In support of his application, the applicant provided a brief by counsel expanding on the foregoing contentions; his performance records; records associated with his participation in the Weight Management Program (WMP) and the demotion action; and extracts from his medical records. The board recommended that the applicant’s case be referred...
AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD 2014 02245
The left knee condition, characterized as “left knee pain with chondromalacia patella” by the MEB, was forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AFI 48-123. The Board directs attention to its rating recommendationbased on the above evidence.Although the final PEB diagnosis was persistent knee pain “due to Patellofemoral Syndrome” and the MEB diagnosis was due to “chondromalacia patella,” the NARSUM diagnosis was due to “subluxation.” Radiographs indicated degenerative changes...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2005-03293
Although primary medical documentation from his medical evaluation while on active duty was not available for review, a 9 Aug 04 record entry reflected the medical opinion that the condition was not caused or aggravated by military service. A complete copy of the Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 22 Dec...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04276
It appears the applicant is requesting her separation with a 20% disability rating be changed to a medical retirement with a 100% disability rating. On 6 Jun 83, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force with severance pay with a disability rating of 20% On 21 Feb 85, she was discharged from the Air Force Reserve. Also that any future promotions, schooling, or awards could not be added to a DD Form 214 after the close out...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05662
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05662 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her service characterization, as reflected in Block 24 of her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be changed from not applicable to honorable. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The Reentry (RE) Code 2C gives her an honorable status, so it should be reflected in Block 24. The remaining...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02078
His maximum weight by Air Force standards was 189 pounds. They indicated that the applicant received a physical examination on 16 July 1981 in conjunction with his involuntary discharge action for failing to meet Air Force Weight Control Program (WCP) standards. Further, we find no evidence in his records that his knee condition prevented him from meeting standards for Air Force weight management.
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02487
The type of his separation be changed from entry-level separation to a medical discharge. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice regarding the applicant’s request that his uncharacterized service be changed to an honorable discharge, his RE code of 2C be changed, his entry level separation be changed to a medical discharge, and his records be corrected to reflect his eligibility for unemployment compensation. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-02825
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02825 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO IN THE MATTER OF: _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her uncharacterized entry level separation be changed to honorable. DPSOS states that based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge...