RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05799
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, block 28, narrative reason, be changed from failed medical/physical procurement standards, to an appropriate status that indicates he was discharged for an injury incurred while on active duty.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was not aware of the error in block 28 of his DD Form 214 until the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) brought it to his attention. As written, the narrative reason would indicate he was discharged because he wasnt able to perform physical requirements of the service. This is incorrect because his separation was due to an injury (dislocated both shoulders) incurred during morning PT. This mischaracterization of why he was discharged has caused and will continue to cause the DVA difficulty when they administer his disability benefits.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 30 May 02.
On 26 Jun 02, the applicant was notified by his commander that he was recommending his discharge for an erroneous enlistment, in accordance with (IAW) AFPD 36-32, Military Retirements and Separations, and AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, chapter 5, section 5c, Defective Enlistments, para. 5.14. The reason for the action was based on a medical narrative, dated 19 Jun 02, that found he did not meet minimum standards to enlist. He should not have been allowed to join the Air Force because of shoulder pain and laxity.
On 26 Jun 02, the applicant signed a memo acknowledging the commanders recommendation for discharge, waived his right to military legal counsel and to submit statements, and that he understood that if discharged for the reason(s) cited, he would not be entitled to any disability, retirement, or severance pay.
On 2 Jul 02, the discharge authority approved the recommendation for discharge; directing the type of discharge being entry level separation (ELS) and service characterization being described as uncharacterized.
On 5 Jul 02, the applicant was furnished an ELS with uncharacterized service, with a narrative reason for separation of failed medical/physical procurement standards, IAW AFI 36-3208.
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memoranda prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibits C and D.
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AETC/SGPS recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice regarding the medical aspects of his separation process. Reviews of the records provided and medical notes from Wilford Hall Medical Center (MHMC) revealed the following findings: the applicants file shows he had right shoulder surgery in 1999 and again in 2000, with satisfactory results, prior to entering the service on 30 May 02. He was seen in Reid Clinic on 19 Jun 02 after injuring his right shoulder during training. His providers determined that this was a re-injury of a condition that existed prior to service. He couldnt continue in training and was subsequently processed for an ELS, IAW AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-3208, Chapter 5, Section C, Paragraph 5.14. Based on the documentation contained in the applicants military personnel records, the separation was carried out in accordance with established policy and administrative procedures. His file does not note what type of corrective surgery he had prior to entering the service, but multiple dislocations, especially after surgery, is disqualifying for military service.
A complete copy of the AETC/SGPS evaluation is at Exhibit C.
AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. Based on the medical authoritys finding that the applicant had a pre-existing condition that would have precluded him from joining the Air Force, that the condition did not meet Air Force standards and was not permanently aggravated by training beyond normal progression of the ailment, the discharge, to include the type of separation, Separation Program Designator (SPD) code, narrative reason for separation, and character of service, was appropriately administered and within the discretion of the discharge authority. The applicant did not provide any evidence that an error or injustice occurred in the processing of his discharge.
A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit D.
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 21 Jul 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). As of this date, no response has been received by this office.
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 an error or injustice. We took notice of the applicants complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR) and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief.
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-2013-05799 in Executive Session on 13 Nov 14 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 16 Dec 13, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Memorandum, AETC/SGPS, dated 17 Apr 14.
Exhibit D. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 21 Jun 14.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Jul 14.
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03479
On 10 Aug 07, she was discharged with a narrative reason for separation of Erroneous entry (other) and a RE code of 2C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AETC/SGPS recommends denial of the applicants requests to change her separation and RE codes. It has been seven years since she was discharged from the service and she did not provide a reason why the application was not submitted within three years of her discharge. The applicant did not file within three years after the alleged error or...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03162
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibits C and D. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. Airmen are given Entry Level Separation and Uncharacterized service characterization when separation is initiated within the first 180 days of continuous active service. A complete...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04733
On 24 Jun 09, the applicant declined a waiver to stay in the Air Force and was processed for entry level separation with an uncharacterized character of service. The complete BCMR Medical Consultants evaluation is at Exhibit E. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 18 Aug 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit F). ...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03113
On 12 May 2014, the discharge authority approved the recommendation that the applicant be discharged. DPSOR did not find any evidence of any errors or injustices in the discharge process. A complete copy of the BCMR Medical Consultants evaluation is at Exhibit E. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 18 June 2015 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit F).
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02663
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02663 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Uncharacterized discharge be upgraded to Honorable. Based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge to include the separation code, narrative reason for separation and character of service was appropriately administered and within the discretion of the discharge authority. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02151
The complete BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicants counsel responded that the BCMR Medical Consultant states the applicant is requesting a change to his discharge to Honorable, Medical. It was a year and almost four months from the time of his surgery to his enlistment and the new injury. The applicants counsel asserts the applicants knee...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02552
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02552 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, Block 24 Character of Service, be corrected to reflect an Honorable discharge. His service characterization of Uncharacterized on his DD Form 214 has prevented him from receiving school benefits. Hence, both the commander and the...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00877
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00877 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His narrative reason for separation of erroneous entry be changed to early release. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01924
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01924 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her uncharacterized discharge be changed to reflect an honorable discharge. ________________________________________________________________ _ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force who served on active duty...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02042
In a letter dated 19 Jun 13, the applicant requested that her case be administratively closed to allow for more time to gather information in response to the Air Force evaluations. The Medical Consultant notes that two separate Air Force policies, AFI 36-3208 and AFI 36-3212, Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement and Separation, may be at crossroads; one which justifies an ELS for the medical condition, pes planus (flat feet), which was likely to have Existed Prior to Service...