RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:		DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00670
	XXXXXXXXXX		COUNSEL: NONE
				HEARING DESIRED: NO


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  His rank at the time of his discharge be changed to Staff 
Sergeant (SSgt, E-5).

2.  His administrative discharge be changed to a discharge with 
severance pay.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was unfairly demoted to the rank of Senior Airman (SrA, E-4) 
and denied reenlistment due to his Fitness Assessment (FA) 
failure.  He was on an active medical profile for an injury he 
sustained during his deployment to Iraq, which precluded him 
from achieving a passing FA score.

In support of his requests, the applicant provides a personal 
statement, copies of his AF Form IMT 348, Informal Line of Duty 
Determination (LOD); AF Form 422, Notification of Air Force 
Member’s Qualification Status; AF Form 469, Duty Limiting 
Condition Report; Reserve Order A-150, memorandums and various 
other documents associated with his requests.

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

AFRC IMT 348 dated 17 May 2012, reflects that the applicant's 
left knee injury and resultant chronic knee pain, was found in 
the LOD.  The investigative narrative states, “While member was 
deployed to Iraq in 2007/2008 he states that he was knocked to 
the ground by a mortar.  He landed on his left knee and later 
complained of pain in the knee.”

AF Form 422, initiated on 4 August 2012, shows the applicant was 
exempted from performing push-ups, sit-ups, one-mile walk, and 
the 1.5-mile run. The expiration date of the profile 
restrictions was 30 January 2013.

AF Form 469, initiated on 4 August 2012, prohibited high impact 
activities with the legs; with an expiration date also 
established as 30 January 2013.  The AF Form 469 does not 
indicate “mobility restrictions,” and no checkmark is placed in 
block “37” to depict a medical condition existed that required 
Medical Evaluation Board or Physical Evaluation Board 
processing.

In a memorandum dated 17 June 2012, the applicant’s rater 
referred his Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) for the period 
18 June 2010 through 17 June 2012.  This referral EPR reflected 
the applicant's failure to meet minimum fitness standards.  The 
memorandum gave the applicant the opportunity to rebut the 
report.

According to Special Order A-31 dated 5 December 2012, the 
applicant was demoted from the grade of SSgt to SrA effective 
and with a date of rank of 5 December 2012.

According to Reserve Order A-150, the applicant was honorably 
discharged from the Air Force Reserve effective 5 March 2013.

The Air Force Military Personnel Data System reflects the 
applicant is ineligible to reenlist due to “Poor Fitness Score.”


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ARPC/A1K recommends denial of the applicant’s request that his 
rank at the time of his discharge be changed to SSgt.  In 
accordance with the AFRC Field Instruction for AF Reserve 
Enlisted Promotion and Demotion Policy, demoted airmen must 
state their intention to appeal in writing.  Members must submit 
the appeal to the servicing Military Personnel Section chief 
within 30 calendar days after acknowledging the final demotion 
decision, unless a delay from the initiating commander is 
authorized.  There is no supporting documentation pertaining to 
this case that shows the applicant exercised his right to appeal 
the demotion once he was officially notified.  In accordance 
with AFI 36-2612, United States Air Force Reserve Reenlistment 
and Retention Program, paragraph 3.8., members may appeal their 
nonselection of reenlistment through one of two options; appeal 
to the Senior Reserve Commander or to an Appeal Board.  There is 
no supporting documentation pertaining to this case that shows 
the applicant exercised his right to appeal the nonselection of 
reenlistment.

After a careful review of the documents presented and a 
conversation between an A1K staff member and the applicant via 
phone on 2 April 2014, it has been determined the applicant did 
not include documentation that shows he exercised his appeal 
rights regarding his demotion and denial of reenlistment action 
which ultimately resulted in his discharge from the Air Force 
Reserve.

The complete A1K evaluation is at Exhibit C.
AFRC/SG recommends denial of the applicant’s request to change 
his administrative discharge to a discharge with severance pay.  
The applicant links an injury he sustained in 2008 during a 
deployment in Iraq and his FA failures.  The case file contains 
an informal LOD initiated on 18 October 2008 addressing a 
possible left meniscus tear [initially treated on 23 January 
2008] due to the same injury while deployed.  Review of the SG 
case file database shows that there are two LOD cases on file 
for the applicant.  The first LOD determination was done in 2008 
for a left knee injury, and found in the LOD.  The second is for 
the same injury, identified as a meniscal tear, and completed at 
the wing level in 2012.   These LOD cases are redundant, as 
nothing was accounted for in the second LOD determination that 
was not considered in the first.  It is unclear why the wing 
prepared this case twice.  There are two profiles provided by 
the applicant, which show that he had a profile restriction for 
high impact, but no duty restrictions.  Additionally, there was 
no requirement for a medical board.  Therefore, the applicant 
was returned to duty in 2008 after surgery and was able to 
perform his military duties.

The complete SG evaluation is at Exhibit C.

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial of the applicant’s 
request to change his administrative discharge to a discharge 
with severance pay.  In order to receive a medical discharge 
there must be a medical condition that precludes deployability 
and/or impedes the applicant from performing his military duties 
of the sufficient level of restriction, e.g., “L4T” profile, and 
duration, e.g., 12 months or more, to warrant processing through 
the Disability Evaluation System.  Thus, the mere fact that the 
applicant was restricted from performing certain portions of his 
FA, does not automatically equate with an unfit finding via 
disability processing.

While it is clear the applicant sought and received evaluations 
of his left knee in 2008, it is not clear if the condition 
precluded the performance of his military duties or required 
exemption from one or more portions of the FA for a continuous 
period of 12 months from between 2008 until 2012.  The case file 
only contains the AF Form 422 initiated on 4 August 2012.  
Specifically, while it is presumed that the applicant had failed 
several FAs to bring into consideration an administrative 
discharge, no medical evidence is supplied to indicate that the 
applicant was exempted from at least one portion of the FA for a 
continuous 12 month period or throughout the period of failures; 
nor that he carried, or should have carried a Duty Limiting 
Condition Report designated as requiring MEB/PEB processing. 
Therefore, the Medical Consultant adopts the analysis and 
recommendation of the SG evaluation dated 16 May 2014.

The complete Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit E.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 19 September 2014, copies of the Air Force and BCMR Medical 
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 F).


THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

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

2.  The application was timely filed.

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 opinions and 
recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary 
responsibility and the BCMR Medical Consultant and adopt the 
rationale expressed 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 this application 
in Executive Sessions on 12 February 2015, under the provisions 
of AFI 36-2603:

       , Panel Chair
       , Member
       , Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR BC-2014-
00670 was considered:

Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 February 2014, w/atchs.
Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C.  Letter, AFRC/A1K, dated 7 April 2014.
Exhibit D.  Letter, AFRC/SG, dated 16 May 2014.
Exhibit E.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 
20 August 2014.
Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 September 2014.