PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:  12 September 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20000037304

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.  

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. Paul A. Petty		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Calvin M. Fowler		Chairperson	
	Ms. Carol J. Suiter		Member	
	Mr. Fred N. Eichorn		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests issue of a DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).

3.  The applicant states that he believes the records are in error because he was hurt in the line of duty and should have received a medical discharge.  Also due to not having a DD Form 214, he has been denied medical benefits at the Veterans Administration (VA) hospital.

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he enlisted in the Army Reserve on 18 September 1980 as a member of the 326th Ordnance Company in Huntington, West Virginia.  He was ordered to Initial Active Duty for Training (IADT) on 
24 October 1980 at Fort Leonard Wood according to IADT Order No. 186-15, dated 18 September 1980, issued by the Armed Forces Examining and Entrance Station, Beckley, West Virginia.  On or about 28 October 1980, the applicant states, “that he slipped on a telephone pole while walking and fell on his tail bone.”  He sustained a contusion (sciatic compression ruled out) to his coccyx (tail bone) determined to be incurred in the line of duty.  It was also noted that he had a left inguinal (groin) hernia by history (existed prior to enlistment).  The applicant was notified by the Fort Leonard Wood USAR Liaison NCO that due to the applicant’s hernia, the applicant was not fit for induction into the Army.  The applicant signed a statement that, “I (applicant) am planning to return home and get an operation to remove the hernia and if I am medically fit, will return to the Reserves for training within the next six months.”  The applicant was released from IADT on 4 November 1980 by orders 214-13, dated 4 November 1980, issued by the Reception Station at Fort Leonard Wood.  The applicant served on IADT from 24 October to 4 November 1980, a total of 12 days.

5.  The applicant was operated on at the Dewitt Army Hospital, Fort Belvoir, Virginia, on 7 July 1981 to correct his inguinal hernia.  On 11 September 1981, the applicant was evaluated at Dewitt Army Hospital and declared fit to return to duty.

6.  In October 1981, the applicant’s Army Reserve unit requested new IADT orders for the applicant.  Orders were not received at that time due to a processing error.  On 12 September 1982, the applicant accumulated 10 unexcused absences from Reserve unit training.  He continued to miss training and receive unexcused absences through December 1982.  On 17 December 1982, the applicant’s commander began proceedings to transfer the applicant to the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) due to the applicant’s unsatisfactory participation.  On 3 January 1983, the 99th Army Reserve Command denied the request for separation since the applicant had not completed IADT.  The applicant was ordered to report to the Beckley Military Entrance Processing Station on 31 January 1983 to undergo a physical examination for suitability to attend IADT.  He was found unfit for enlistment or retention by the examining doctor who recommended the applicant be discharged under authority of chapters 2 and 3, Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness).  After processing the physical evaluation, on 9 June 1983, the applicant was given a letter by his commander, subject: Discharge Due to Medical Disqualification for Retention.  The letter gave the applicant various options according to paragraph 12-1, Army Regulation 135-178 (Enlisted Separations).  The applicant, by his signature, elected to be discharged from the USAR due to medical conditions which rendered him medically disqualified for further retention.

7.  The applicant’s command forwarded a request for the applicant’s discharge to the Headquarters, First U.S. Army.  First U. S. Army denied the request noting that the applicant had been injured while on IADT active duty.  First U. S. Army directed that the unit commander contact the servicing medical activity and schedule the applicant, “for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) to determine the applicant’s fitness for duty and whether the action should be referred to a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) for evaluation of possible disability benefits.”  On 27 September 1983, the applicant was evaluated at DeWitt Army Hospital by a orthopedic doctor and a surgeon.  They found him fully fit and that he had no disqualifying conditions for military service.  No MEB or PEB was required.  On 
19 October 1983, the applicant was notified that he had been found fit for duty.  He was directed to return to unit training assemblies and that he would be scheduled for IADT for basic training and Advanced Individual Training (AIT).  The applicant filed an Inspector General (IG) compliant with the 99th Army Reserve Command IG concerning the differing medical fitness findings.  On 
14 December 1983, the IG recommended to the applicant that he begin attending drills with his Reserve unit, that he report for IADT as ordered, and that he present his medical evidence there for further medical examination and fitness determination.

8.  On 29 December 1983, new orders were issued directing the applicant to report to Fort Jackson on 23 January 1984 for basic training and AIT.  The applicant received the orders in the mail on 11 January 1984.  On 8 January 1984, the applicant had again accrued 11 unexcused absences and was declared an unsatisfactory participant.  On 19 January 1984, the applicant again received a medical evaluation at the Military Entrance and Processing Station in Beckley, West Virginia.  The examining medical doctor and consulting orthopedic doctor found the applicant not qualified for active duty.  These findings were forwarded to First U. S. Army on 14 February 1984  The applicant was honorably discharged from the U. S. Army Reserve on 17 February 1984 by orders 28-23, dated 17 February 1984, issued by Headquarters, First U. S. Army.

9.  According to AR 635-5 (Separation Documents), paragraph 1-3a(3), the 
DD Form 214 is given to members of the Reserve components who serve on ADT for 90 days or more.  For those who serve less than 90 days, a DD Form 220 is issued according to AR 135-210.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant is not authorized a DD Form 214 for his 12 days active duty since the DD Form 214 is for periods of active duty of 90 days or more.  He should be issued a DD Form 220 for this period of service, 24 October 1980 through 4 November 1980.

2.  Based on the applicant’s medical conditions which rendered him medically disqualified for further retention in the USAR, the applicant was given separation options according to paragraph 12-1, Army Regulation 135-178 (Enlisted Separations).  The applicant, by his signature, elected to be discharged from the USAR due to medical conditions which rendered him medically disqualified for further retention.  This does not say nor should it be misunderstood to be a medical discharge.  It is a discharge due to unfitness for retention.  Medical review did not find cause for an MEB, PEB, or medical discharge.

3.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected for the individual concerned by issuing him a DD Form 220 for his 
12 days of active duty at Fort Leonard Wood, 24 October 1980 through 
4 November 1980

2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

__cf___  __cs___  __fe____  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		___Calvin M. Fowler___
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000037304	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000912	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	Partial GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  108	Disability Separation or Retirement	
2.   100	Administrative Matters	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.