IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 14 February 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150014555 BOARD VOTE: _________ _______ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ___x____ ___x____ ___x____ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION 2 Enclosures 1. Board Determination/Recommendation 2. Evidence and Consideration IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 14 February 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150014555 BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: 1. The Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by amending his DD Form 214 to show the National Defense Service Medal and the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar. 2. The Board further determined the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief. As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to any relief in excess of that described above. ___________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. IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 14 February 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150014555 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 his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be corrected to show his service was characterized as honorable versus "uncharacterized." Additionally, he requests the following be added to his DD Form 214: * Army Service Ribbon (ASR) * National Defense Service Medal (NDSM) * Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle and Grenade Bars * basic combat training (BCT) and his advance individual training (AIT) course 2. He states he served his country honorably. In BCT he was injured, but in spite of his injuries he completed the training and graduated from AIT in military occupational specialty (MOS) 76C (Equipment Records and Parts Specialist). He denies his injury existed prior to service (EPTS) and maintains his injury occurred in BCT. 3. He provides his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) and DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record - Part II). CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing. 2. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 9 October 1992. 3. A certificate from the U.S. Army Training Center, 1st Basic Training Brigade, Fort Jackson, SC shows he successfully completed BCT on 17 December 1992. 4. A Narrative Summary for Medical Board dated 11 February 1993 shows, in effect: a. The applicant had a history of bilateral knee arthroscopy in 1988 secondary to an accident at home where he sustained a violent twisting injury in both knees. After the initial arthroscopies of both knees, which were done at the same time, he underwent intensive physical therapy and returned to a relatively active life style in high school. He participated on the high school baseball team. During BCT at Fort Jackson, SC, in the fourth week of training, he started having recurrent knee pain. The right knee was always worse than the left secondary to running and road marching. b. He went on multiple sick call visits and was treated conservatively. He managed to pass BCT and arrived at AIT at Fort Lee, VA. Although he was able to pass the physical fitness test, every time he participated in physical training (PT), he had to go to the Troop Medical Clinic for temporary profiles and medications. Aggravating factors seemed to have been stairs (he lived on the third floor of the barracks), road marching, running, jumping, kneeling, and squatting. Rest and staying warm seemed to be the most relieving factors, if any. It was felt that no matter what PT he performed he had to go on sick call multiple times. This affected his AIT attendance and he was not a candidate for further military service since PT would continue to aggravate his ongoing EPTS condition. c. The applicant had difficulty keeping up with his classmates. He had to go on numerous sick call visits; therefore, he lost valuable class time. The evaluating physician recommended that he be referred for consideration for a medical separation due to the EPTS knee condition. 5. On 11 February 1993, the applicant requested a separation and a waiver of a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB). He stated if his application was approved, he understood he would be separated by reason of an EPTS disability. He further stated he understood the Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) would determine any entitlement to VA benefits. 6. A DA Form 3947 (Medical Evaluation Board (MEBD) Proceedings), dated 16 February 1993, shows the applicant was diagnosed with "Status post arthroscopies of both right and left knees, chondromalacia patella." The approximate date of origin is listed as EPTS. The board recommended the applicant be discharged in accordance with Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation), chapter 5 (EPTS Medical Conditions). The findings and recommendation of the board were approved. 7. On 17 February 1993, the applicant signed the DA Form 3947 and initialed the block stating "I agree with the board's findings and recommendation." He elected not to appeal the findings and recommendation. 8. His DA Form 2-1 shows in: a. Item 6 (MOS), no entry. b. Item 9 (Awards, Decorations, and Campaigns) the: * ASR * NDSM * Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-16), dated 16 November 1992 c. Item 17 (Civilian Education and Military Schools) U.S. Army Quarter Master (QM) School, 76C, 10 weeks, completed "Yes" 1993. d. Item 35 (Record of Assignments), effective 18 December 1992, AIT, Company W, 244th QM Battalion, Fort Lee, VA. 9. The applicant's record is void of a certificate of completion, orders or any type of documentation verifying he successfully completed AIT and was awarded primary (P) MOS 76C. There is also no orders or other documentation that shows he qualified with the hand grenade. 10. He was discharged on 25 February 1993 with uncharacterized service. He completed 4 months and 17 days of creditable active service. His DD Form 214 shows in: * Item 11 (Primary Specialty) – None * Item 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) – None * Item 25 (Separation Authority) – Army Regulation 635-40, Chapter 5 * Item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) – Physical Disability Prior to Entry on Active Duty – Medical Board REFERENCES: 1. Army Regulation 635-40, as in effect at the time, provided for separation of an enlisted Soldier for non-service aggravated EPTS conditions when a Soldier requested waiver of a PEB evaluation. Each case was to meet the following criteria: * Soldier is eligible for referral into the disability system * Soldier does not meet medical retention standards as determined by the MEBD * The disqualifying defect or condition existed prior to entry on current period of duty and has not been aggravated by such duty * The Soldier is mentally competent * Knowledge of information about his or her medical condition would not be harmful to the Soldier's well being * Further hospitalization or institutional care is not required * After being advised of the right to a full and fair hearing, the Soldier still desires to waive PEB action * Soldier has been advised that a PEB evaluation is required for receipt of Army disability benefits, but waiver of the PEB will not prevent applying for VA benefits 2. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy, criteria, and administrative instructions concerning individual and unit military awards. It states: a. The ASR was established by the Secretary of the Army on 10 April 1981. Effective 1 August 1981, all members of the Active Army, Army National Guard, and Army Reserve in an active Reserve status are eligible for the award upon successful completion of initial entry training. The award may be awarded retroactively to those personnel who completed the required training before 1 August 1981 provided they had an Active Army status on or after 1 August 1981. b. The NDSM is awarded for honorable active service for any period between 27 July 1950 and 27 July 1954, 1 January 1961 and 14 August 1974, 2 August 1990 and 30 November 1995, and 11 September 2001 and a date to be determined. 3. Army Regulation 635-5 (Personnel Separations), in effect at the time, established standardized procedures for preparation and distribution of the DD Form 214. The regulation stated, in pertinent part, to enter in item 11 of the DD Form 214 the titles of all MOSs held for at least 1 year and include for each MOS the number of years and months served. For time determination, 16 days or more count as a month. Do not count BCT and AIT. 4. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 3-9 contains guidance on entry-level separations. It states that a separation will be described as entry level with uncharacterized service if the Soldier has less than 180 days of continuous active duty service at the time separation action is initiated. DISCUSSION: 1. The applicant requests his DD Form 214 be corrected to show his service was characterized as honorable versus "uncharacterized." 2. A medical doctor stated the applicant had a history of bilateral knee arthroscopy in 1988 secondary to an accident at home where he sustained a violent twisting injury in both knees. An MEBD was conducted and the applicant was found unfit for duty due to status post arthroscopies of both right and left knees, chonromalacia patella that was an EPTS condition. The board recommended that he be discharged in accordance with Army Regulation 635-40, chapter 5. He concurred with the findings and recommendation of the MEBD and waived his PEB evaluation. He was then discharged for physical disability that existed prior to entry on active duty. Because he was in an entry level status, his service was uncharacterized. 3. An uncharacterized discharge is not meant to be a negative reflection of a Soldier's military service. It merely means the Soldier has not been in the Army long enough for his or her character of service to be rated as honorable or otherwise. 4. Although the applicant's DA Form 2-1 indicates he completed the MOS 76C course, the preponderance of evidence indicates he did not actually complete the course. There is no evidence such as a certificate or orders awarding him MOS 76C as his PMOS. It appears the course completion information was prematurely entered on his DA Form 2-1 as evidenced by the Narrative Summary from the MEBD which confirmed he was having difficulty keeping up with his class mates due to the numerous sick call visits. Because he did not complete initial entry training, he did not become eligible for the ASR. 5. The evidence confirmed the applicant completed BCT; however, this information is not required to be placed on the DD Form 214. 6. His DA Form 2-1 shows he was awarded the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar on 16 November 1992. This qualification badge is not listed on his DD Form 214. 7. There is no evidence and the applicant did not provide any to show he successfully qualified with the hand grenade. 8. Although his service was uncharacterized, the evidence indicates his service was "honorable" for the purposes of the criteria for the NDSM. This award is not listed on his DD Form 214. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150014555 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150014555 6 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2