BOARD DATE: 22 April 2014 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20130014351 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show he was separated due to medical reasons. 2. The applicant states he sought medical treatment for his severe back pain from January 2013 until his discharge in April 2013 due to unsatisfactory performance. His back issues were not properly addressed. He was discharged because he did not pass the end of course Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) due to his severe low back pain. 3. The applicant provides copies of: * DD Form 214 * Medical Records (approximately 90 pages) * Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Rating Decision, dated 4 March 2014 CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. On 4 September 2012, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army. He was immediately assigned to Fort Jackson, SC for enrollment in the basic combat training (BCT) course. 2. On or about 19 November 2012, the applicant was assigned to Fort Eustis, VA for enrollment in advanced individual training (AIT) for military occupational specialty 15S (OH-58D Helicopter Repairer). 3. A Standard Form (SF) 600 (Chronological Record of Medical Care), as provided by the applicant, dated 11 December 2012 provides: * Source of information is from the applicant * Complaint is neck popping and causing mid-back pain * Complaint also of pain in back of neck * No history of trauma * First visit for this complaint * The pain has been located in lower back for 3 days * Pain described as sharp * Has tried stretching without relief and running makes it worse * Pain severity is 7 on scale of 10 * Released with duty limitations, temporary profile (T2) until 20 December 2012 * Ice/heat massage treatment was prescribed 4. A DA Form 4856 (Developmental Counseling Form) dated 19 February 2013, indicates the applicant failed the APFT. He was informed that he had failed to meet the minimum score of 60 points in each of the three test events. He was further advised that this was his first attempt. If he did not pass this APFT he may be held over for another class, or could be separated from the Army. 5. A DA Form 4856, dated 26 February 2013, indicates that the applicant had failed to achieve a passing score on six APFT diagnostics. On 25 February 2013, he again failed the APFT. He was informed that as a result of his second APFT failure, he was being recommended for separation from the Army. 6. A DA Form 705 (Army Physical Fitness Test Scorecard) shows that on 19 February 2013 the applicant failed all three events and had a combined total of 151 points. It also shows that on 25 February 2013 he again failed all three events and had a combined total of 143 points. 7. A DA Form 3822 (Report of Mental Status Evaluation) dated 8 March 2013, reports the applicant was cleared for administrative separation. It also stated: * He was fit for full duty, including deployment * He had no obvious cognitive impairments * He was cooperative * His perception was normal * He was unlikely to be impulsive * He was found to be not dangerous to either himself or to others * He was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder with depressed mood * He was cleared to participate in physical training within the limits of his profile 8. A DD Form 2807-1 (Report of Medical History), dated 11 March 2013, shows that the applicant reported he had been experiencing lower back and hip pain since "buddy team" live fire in BCT. The back part of his neck was somewhat numb to the touch. His feet were still numb on a few toes and every morning he got shooting pains in his feet. He had been to the troop medical clinic at Fort Eustis for his neck and back pain. He was waiting on his feet to see if they would get better. He contended that all of his medical problems appeared around the 7th or 8th week of BCT and have been getting worse. 9. A DD Form 2808 (Report of Medical Examination) dated 11 March 2013, reported that the applicant was qualified for separation. It identified his low back pain as a significant or disqualifying defect. It summarized his defects and diagnoses as low back pain with some psychological overlay. It recommended further evaluation by a specialist. 10. An SF 600, dated 22 March 2013, as provided by the applicant, provides: * Lumbar spine radiographs taken on 1 February 2013 * Findings: alignment of the lumbar spine is normal; vertebral body heights and disc space heights are preserved; no evidence of malalignment; no generative disease noted * Impression: A lucency through L5 pars region may represent pars interarticularis defect/old trauma * Further oblique radiographs of lumbar spine would be beneficial 11. An SF 600, dated 22 March 2013, as provided by the applicant, provides: * Oblique radiographs of the lumbar spine visualized no L5 defects * There was a small cortical step off with thin lucency within the L4 right pars interarticularis * Impression: early right L4 pars defect * Conservative treatment for 2 weeks then reassess progress * If no change, will consider further imaging or orthopedic referral * Noted: applicant separating soon due to failed APFT, blamed his back and mentioned that he thinks he should receive medical board and not chaptered 12. Five SFs 600, dated 22 March through 4 April 2013, report the applicant's physical therapy. He was released on 4 April 2013 without limitations. 13. On 27 March 2013, the applicant's commander notified him of his intention to separate him from the military under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13 for unsatisfactory performance. The commander cited the applicant's second consecutive end-of-course APFT wherein he failed to meet the minimum passing score in all three events. The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification. 14. On 28 March 2013, the applicant consulted with counsel. He elected not to make a statement in his own behalf. He also waived consulting counsel and representation by counsel and personal appearance before an administrative board. 15. On 28 March 2013, the commander recommended the applicant be separated from the Army based on the reasons and regulatory cite discussed above. 16. On 28 March 2013, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation and directed that the applicant be discharged with an honorable characterization of service. 17. On 5 April 2013, the applicant was discharged accordingly. He completed 7 months and 2 days of creditable active duty service. He was given a separation program designator (SPD) code of JHJ indicating he was separated due to unsatisfactory performance. He was given a reentry (RE) code of 3 and an honorable characterization of service. 18. On 14 March 2014, the VA awarded the applicant service connection for the following medical conditions: a. Degenerative disc disease multilevel to include lumbar discectomy L4-L5 and intervertebral disc syndrome with lumbar spondylitis (claimed as low back pain), rated at 10 percent disabling effective 6 April 2013; and b. Radiculopathy of the right lower extremity associated with degenerative disc disease multilevel to include lumbar discectomy L4-L5 and intervertebral disc syndrome with lumbar spondylosis (claimed as low back pain) rated at 10 percent disabling, effective 6 April 2013. 19. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities and reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. The SPD code of JHJ was the appropriate code for the applicant based upon the guidance provided in Army Regulation 635-5-1 for Soldiers separating under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, due to unsatisfactory performance. 20. Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation) provides: a. that the mere presence of an impairment does not, of itself, justify a finding of unfitness because of physical disability. In each case, it is necessary to compare the nature and degree of physical disability present with the requirements of the duties the member reasonably may be expected to perform because of his or her office, rank, grade or rating; and b. that when a member is being separated by reason other than physical disability, his or her continued performance of assigned duty commensurate with his or her rank or grade until he or she is scheduled for separation or retirement creates a presumption that he or she is fit. This presumption can be overcome only by clear and convincing evidence that he or she was unable to perform his or her duties for a period of time or that acute grave illness or injury or other deterioration of physical condition, occurring immediately prior to or coincident with separation, rendered the member unfit. 21. Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical fitness) provides that for an individual to be found unfit by reason of physical disability, he must be unable to perform the duties of his office, grade, rank, or rating. Performance of duty despite impairment would be considered presumptive evidence of physical fitness. 22. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1201, provides for the physical disability retirement of a member who has at least 20 years of service or a disability rating of at least 30% and Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1203, provides for the physical disability separation of a member who has less than 20 years of service and a disability rating at less than 30%. 23. Title 38, U.S. Code, sections 1110 and 1131, permit the VA to award compensation for disabilities which were incurred in or aggravated by active military service. However, an award of a higher VA rating does not establish error or injustice on the part of the Army. The Army rates only conditions determined to be physically unfitting at the time of discharge which disqualify the Soldier from further military service. The Army disability rating is to compensate the individual for the loss of a military career. The VA does not have authority or responsibility for determining physical fitness for military service. The VA awards disability ratings to veterans for service-connected conditions, including those conditions detected after discharge, to compensate the individual for loss of civilian employability. Unlike the Army, the VA can evaluate a veteran throughout his or her lifetime, adjusting the percentage of disability based upon that agency's examinations and findings. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant contends that his DD Form 214 should be corrected to show he was separated due to medical reasons. He argues that he suffered from low back pain that precluded him from passing the APFT which was the reason for his separation. 2. The evidence of record shows that in December 2012 the applicant was medically examined for his complaint of low back pain. He was given a temporary physical profile and released back to his unit with duty limitations until 20 December 2012. Ice/heat massage treatment was prescribed. 3. In February 2013, the applicant twice failed the APFT resulting in his commander recommending his separation for unsatisfactory performance. His subsequent medical examination for separation processing found him to be fully qualified for separation but did recommend further examination by a specialist. Radiographs showed a normal lumbar spine; but, there was a lucency through the L5 pars region indicating the possibility of a defect or old trauma. However, after he completed his 2-week period of physical therapy he was released without limitations. 4. The applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights. The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all of the facts of the case. 5. The SPD and RE codes shown on his DD Form 214 indicates he was separated based on unsatisfactory performance. The documentary evidence of record does not indicate any error or injustice. 6. While the evidence shows the applicant did have a low back pain, it does not show conclusively that his condition was the proximate cause of his failure to pass the APFT. More importantly, there is no evidence to show his low back pain prevented him from performing his duties (of a soon-to-be helicopter repairer). His records do not show that he suffered from any medically unfitting condition that would have required processing for discharge through medical channels. 7. The VA rating decision in March 2014 was considered in this case. It showed he was rated at 10 percent disabling for each of two conditions based on his low back pain. However, it does not show that his medical condition was the same or worse at the time of his separation almost a year earlier. 8. In view of the above, the applicant's request should be denied. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ___x_____ __x______ ___x__ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. _______ _ x _______ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20130014351 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20130014351 7 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1