Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02186
Original file (BC 2014 02186.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02186

  			COUNSEL:  NONE

			HEARING DESIRED:  NO


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The reason for separation on his DD Form 214, Certificate of 
Release or Discharge from Active Duty, item 30, should read 
“Discharge due to disability,” and not Convenience of the 
Government, “Did not meet the minimum medical standards for 
enlistment.”


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He is trying to purchase a home using a Department of Veteran’s 
Affairs (DVA) home loan, which requires a Certificate of 
Eligibility.    Although he received one in the past, he was 
recently denied the Certificate because of his DD Form 214 
information. 

According to DVA rating decision 29505526, he was found to be 
qualified for enlistment.  Item D states “There is evidence of 
aggravation of the right knee during service to the extent he 
became unable to perform assigned military duties.” 

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 8 May 72, the applicant entered the Regular Air Force.  

On 8 Jun 72, a medical board convened and determined that based 
on a pre-existing knee condition, that required knee surgery 
prior to enlistment, the applicant should be discharged.  The 
board concluded that the physical defect in the knee precluded 
full utilization in the military service.

On 15 Jun 72, he was honorably discharged with an entry level 
separation.  He was credited with 1 month and 8 days of active 
service.     


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AETC/SGPS recommends denial.  The applicant did not provide any 
evidence that an error or injustice occurred in processing his 
discharge.  Based on the documentation in the applicant’s master 
personnel records, the discharge was appropriately administered 
and within the discretion of the discharge authority. 

He had right knee surgery in 1969 and continued without incident 
until he entered the military.  Following his knew surgery in 
1969; it was recommended he have a second operation to remove a 
fragment that was still present in the right knee.  The second 
surgery was not performed.  During the first month of his 
training, his right knee became so painful that he couldn’t 
continue in training.  An orthopedic evaluation on 8 Jun 72 
shows he was admitted to the central base dispensary with a 
chief complaint of right knee pain.  He had been seen in the 
orthopedic clinic earlier and was given the diagnosis of mild 
chondromalcia of the right knee.  This condition can remain 
asymptomatic if one is not exposed to physical activity, but may 
become symptomatic if engaged in strenuous activities such as 
basic military training as was the case here.    

The complete SGPS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial indicating the applicant has not 
filed a timely petition.  It has been 42 years since the 
applicant’s discharge and no reason was given for not submitting 
a petition within three years of discharge.  The discharge was 
consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of 
the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the 
discharge authority. 

There was no evidence of an error or injustice in the processing 
of the discharge.  A Jun 82 medical board concluded that the 
applicant had a pre-existing medical condition that should have 
precluded him from enlisting in the Air Force.  Hence, the 
decision to discharge the applicant was correct and in 
accordance with the discharge regulation. 

The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit D.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant is in total disagreement with item 6 where it 
states he did not provide any evidence that an error or 
injustice occurred during the process of his discharge.  He 
highlights the evidence he sent includes the following:

a)	His DD Form 214 which states in box 30 remarks “Did not meet 
the minimum medical standards for enlistment;” 

b)	A copy of the DVA rating decision, item F, paragraph 1, 
sentence 2 which reads, “Examination 05/01/1972, “He was 
found to be qualified for enlistment;” 

c)	A copy of the DVA rating decision, item D, paragraph 1, 
sentences 1 and 3 stating “Veteran had surgery to the right 
knee prior to entering active duty.  There is evidence of 
aggravation to the right knee during service to the extent 
he became unable to perform assigned military duties;” 

d)	A copy of his previous Certificate of Eligibility when he 
bought a home in 1996.  

He strongly disagrees with the statement made that he asked for 
the discharge.  He stayed in civilian quarters while his 
Sergeant fought on his behalf to stay in the service.  

The reason for the delay in asking for the change in Box 30 on 
his DD Form 214 was because he had not had trouble when he 
purchased his first home back in 1996.  As he previously stated, 
he was denied the Certificate of Eligibility in 2014 and was 
informed that the information should be changed to “Discharged 
due to disability.”

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit E.


FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD:

After careful consideration of applicant’s request and the 
available evidence of record, we find the application untimely.  
The applicant did not file within three years after the alleged 
error or injustice was discovered as required by Title 10, 
United States Code, Section 1552 and Air Force Instruction    
36-2603.  The applicant has not shown a plausible reason for the 
delay in filing, and we are not persuaded that the record raises 
issues of error or injustice which require resolution on the 
merits.  Thus, we cannot conclude it would be in the interest of 
justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to file in a timely 
manner.  

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 documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2014-02186 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 27 May 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AETC/SGPS, dated 9 Sep 14.
	Exhibit D.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 12 Dec 14.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, Applicant, dated 20 Jan 15.

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02042

    Original file (BC 2013 02042.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03113

    Original file (BC 2014 03113.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 Consultant’s 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 | CY2012 | BC-2012-05045

    Original file (BC-2012-05045.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 21 Aug 95, the applicant was informed of the findings and recommendations of the board and did not provide a letter of exception or rebuttal. The complete SGPS 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 6 Nov 12 and 14 Jan 13, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibits D). Therefore, we agree with the opinion and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02476

    Original file (BC 2014 02476.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 6 Dec 12, the case was found to be legally sufficient and the discharge authority approved the commander’s recommendation, directing the applicant be issued an entry-level separation with a basis for discharge of fraudulent entry. The applicant’s commander notified him on 5 Dec 12 he was recommending him for discharge from the Air Force for entry-level separation (Fraudulent Entry) for deliberately concealing a prior service medical condition. The following documentary evidence...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-02471

    Original file (BC-2012-02471.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denying the applicant’s request to change his separation. Had the Air Force known of this condition at the time of his enlistment, the applicant would not have been allowed entry into the military. The applicant’s discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05601

    Original file (BC 2013 05601.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05601 XXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her entry level separation be changed to a medical discharge with benefits. Her dependent medical records reflect that she had an allergy to "pecan" nuts. Nevertheless, since the applicant was presumed fit to enter military service [at least from a musculoskeletal perspective] and she was presumably...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04908

    Original file (BC-2012-04908.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04908 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Item 28, Narrative Reason for Separation, on her DD Form 214, Certificate of Discharge or Release from Active Duty, be changed from “erroneous entry – other” to “medical discharge -...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01758

    Original file (BC-2013-01758.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The documentation on file in the master personnel records supports the basis for discharge and his entry level service characterization. The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit D. AFPC/DPSOA recommends his RE code be changed to “2C,” which denotes "Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service." The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit E. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05799

    Original file (BC 2013 05799.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02367

    Original file (BC 2014 02367.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02367 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Separation Code (SPD) of JFW (erroneous enlistment; medical condition disqualifying for military service, with no medical waiver approved) be changed to Permanent Physical Disability, with an honorable discharge instead of uncharacterized service. The applicant is requesting her separation be changed to...