ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:

	BOARD DATE:  25 April 2019

	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20160013742


APPLICANT REQUESTS:  reconsideration of his prior request for correction of his 
DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to reflect:

* honorable discharge due to physical disability (not existing prior to service (EPTS)) 

As new requests, he is additionally requesting correction of his DD Form 214 to reflect:

* completion of 63B (Light Wheeled Mechanic) military education course
* his military occupational specialty (MOS) as 63B
* his rank/grade as private enlisted two (PV2)/E-2 in lieu of private (PV1)/E-1

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: 

* self-authored letter
* DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty)
* Headquarters, U.S. Army Training Center and Fort Jackson Orders 203-1303, dated 22 July 1999
* prior Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) Record of Proceedings in Docket Number AR20150011377 on 30 June 2016

FACTS:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the ABCMR in Docket Number AR20150011377 on 30 June 2016.

2.  The applicant states:

	a.  This letter is in response to ABCMR correspondence dated 1 July 2016, wherein his request to alter his DD Form 214 to reflect an honorable discharge was denied.  He has done further research into his case and found that while the Board will not grant him an honorable discharge, changes still must be made and several errors still exist.

	b.  First and foremost, his DD Form 214 at item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) states he was separated because of a disability that existed prior service.  He has proven with previous documentation that this is incorrect.  He has more than proved his injuries as well as the disability associated with these injuries were incurred while in service to his country.

	c.  According to Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 3-7, an honorable discharge is discretionary based on the military record.  He completed training and as was pointed out by the Board in the prior Record of Proceedings, this is not reflected on his DD Form 214.  He previously supplied the evidence showing this and now requests that his DD Form 214 reflect his role as a Light Wheeled Vehicle Mechanic, 63B.

	d.  Finally, according to his records there have been many questions surrounding his rank.  Near the end of his service he was to be promoted to the rank/grade of PV2/E-2 and was even told he could sew on the rank.  He provided documents to the Board which show he was a PV2/E-2.  How can rank disappear?  Was this out of spite because he was injured?  

	e.  He was forced to sign documents and forced to do physical training on an injured arm regardless of a medical exception.  He was warned that documents could disappear very quickly if he didn’t cooperate.  He was never offered any type of counseling and had he been able to talk it out he could very well be on his 18th year of service.  Once again, he is proud to have served.  Based on his disability and his VA service-connected disabilities, rated at 60 percent, he requests that his discharge be altered to reflect his true service record and his truest dedication to his country.

3.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 14 January 1999, in the rank/grade of private/E-1.  He was assured of attending the Army school course titled Light Wheel Vehicle Mechanic for MOS 63B.

4.  With his prior application, the applicant provided a U.S. Army Training Center, Fort Jackson, SC certificate which shows he successfully completed Basic Combat Training on 8 April 1999.  His rank is listed as private on the certificate.

5.  He also provided a U.S. Army Training Center, Fort Jackson, SC, certificate which shows he successfully completed the Light Wheel Vehicle Mechanic Course 610-63B on 22 June 1999.  His rank is listed as private on the certificate.

6.  Headquarters, U.S. Army Medical Department Activity, Fort Jackson, SC, memorandum, dated 1 July 1999, shows:

* a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) was initiated on the applicant
* the document lists his rank as PV1
* his most recent performance of duty:  he had no motivation and did not want to work as a team or be in the Army
* any special limitation of duty due to his physical condition:  he could not do push-ups, carry more than 15 pounds, or perform duties as a 63B mechanic
* his ability to adequately perform the duties normally expected of an individual of the Soldier’s office, grade, rank or rating:  refers the reader to the above prior statement
* the Soldier’s current duty assignment, anticipated future assignments, branch, age, and career specialties:  his MOS as 63B, his age 18, and that he did not want to go to Korea.

7.  Headquarters, U.S. Army Training Center and Fort Jackson Orders 203-1303, dated 22 July 1999, discharged him from the Regular Army effective 26 July 1999.  The orders refer to him by the rank PV2.

8.  There is no evidence of record he was ever promoted to the rank/grade of PV2/E-2.

9.  He was discharged on 26 July 1999, under the provisions of Army Regulation 
635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation), chapter 5, due to disability, EPTS, medical board, after 6 months and 13 days of net active service this period.  His DD Form 214 shows the following:

* item 4a (Grade, Rate, or Rank):  PV1
* item 4b (Pay Grade):  E-1
* item 11 (Primary Specialty):  NONE//NOTHING FOLLOWS
* item 14 (Military Education):  NONE//NOTHING FOLLOWS
* item 24 (Character of Service):  UNCHARACTERIZED

10.  His records are void of further evidence of record expounding upon the complete facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s discharge.  The diagnosed disability for which he was separated is not in his available records for review.

11.  He provided a letter from Nassau Orthopedic Surgeons, dated 25 October 1999, which states:

* the applicant had an injury to the wrist while in the military in June 1999
* he fell, injuring the wrist, and since then has had pain and discomfort in the dorsum of the wrist (back upper side of wrist)
* examination disclosed tenderness and pain in the snuff box (divot at the base of your thumb and wrist) with pain on dorsiflexion and radial deviation of the wrist
* x-rays of the wrist disclosed the presence of an early non-union of the base of the navicular (boat-shaped bone between the hand and the forearm on the thumb side of the wrist)
* there is also an indication of previous history of fractured styloid ulna (the bump that protrudes at the wrist opposite the thumb), which is a previous injury sustained 7 years ago
* the fractured navicular is the recent injury and is related to his injury in June

12.  A letter from the VA, dated 30 March 2015, shows the applicant was given a 
service-connected disability rating of 10 percent for residuals of chronic left wrist sprain (previously addressed as history of nonunion of the left navicular of the wrist), effective 5 December 2014.

13.  On 7 March 2019, the Army Review Boards Agency (ARBA) senior medical advisor provided an advisory opinion.  The ARBA senior medical advisor states:

	a.  A review of the applicant’s VA Compensation and Pension Exam report for his wrist on 26 March 2015 states the applicant had an injury to his left wrist at age 11.  It was casted and treated and he went into the Army in 1999, having had a physical examination in 1998.  His initial physical was normal.  He fell and reinjured the wrist after Advanced Individual Training and was eventually medically discharged from the Army secondary to his wrist problem.  He continues to have numbness and tingling in the wrist with decreased range of motion.  He takes Ibuprofen when the wrist gets bad.

	b.  The applicant did not meet medical retention standards, presumably for EPTS left wrist condition.  The available documentation found no evidence of a medical disability or condition that would support a change to the character and or reason for the discharge in this case.  With no service treatment records available, the presumption of regularity applies in this case.  The Army has neither the role nor the authority to compensate for progression or complications of service-connected conditions after separation.  A copy of the complete medical advisory was provided to the Board for their review and consideration.

14.  The applicant was provided a copy of the advisory opinion on 12 March 2019, and given an opportunity to submit comments, but he did not respond.

15.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.

	a.  Paragraph 5-1 states unless the reason for separation requires a specific characterization, a Soldier being separated for the convenience of the government will be awarded a character of service of honorable, under honorable conditions, or an uncharacterized description of service if in an entry-level status.

	b.  Paragraph 5-11 states Soldiers who were not medically qualified under procurement medical fitness standards when accepted for enlistment or who became medically disqualified under these standards prior to entry on active duty or active duty for training for initial entry training may be separated.  Such conditions must be discovered during the first 6 months of active duty.  For character of service, paragraph 5-1 should be adhered to.

	c.  Section II (Terms) of the Glossary defines entry-level status for Regular Army Soldiers as the first 180 days of continuous active duty or the first 180 days of continuous active duty following a break of more than 92 days of active military service.

16.  Title 10, U.S. Code, chapter 61, provides the Secretaries of the Military Departments with authority to retire or discharge a member if they find the member unfit to perform military duties because of physical disability.  The U.S. Army Physical Disability Agency is responsible for administering the Army physical disability evaluation system and executes Secretary of the Army decision-making authority as directed by Congress in chapter 61 and in accordance with Department of Defense Directive 1332.18 and Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation).

17.  Army Regulation 635-40 establishes the Army Disability Evaluation System and sets forth policies, responsibilities, and procedures that apply in determining whether a Soldier is unfit because of physical disability to reasonably perform the duties of his office, grade, rank, or rating.

	a.  Paragraph 3-2 states disability compensation is not an entitlement acquired by reason of service-incurred illness or injury; rather, it is provided to Soldiers whose service is interrupted and who can no longer continue to reasonably perform because of a physical disability incurred or aggravated in military service.

	b.  Chapter 5 contains guidance on the separation of enlisted members for non-service aggravated EPTS conditions when the Soldier requests a waiver of a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB).  The case must meet the following conditions:

* Soldier is eligible for referral into the disability system
* Soldier does not meet medical retention standards
* the disqualifying defect or condition existed prior to entry on current period of duty and has not been aggravated by such duty
* 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

	c.  Unless otherwise indicated the Soldier will be issued an Honorable discharge Certificate or a General Discharge Certificate.  If the Soldier is in entry level status at the time of processing, the DD Form 214 may describe service as uncharacterized.

18.  Army Regulation 600-8-19 (Enlisted Promotions and Reductions) prescribes policies and procedures governing promotions and reduction of Army enlisted personnel.  It states eligibility criteria for automatic (Regular Army and U.S. Army Reserve) or immediate (Army National Guard) promotion to PV2 is 6 months’ time in service.

19.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Personnel Separations – Separation Documents), in effect at the time, prescribed the separation documents prepared for Soldiers upon retirement, discharge, or release from active military service or control of the Army.  The instructions for completion of the DD Form 214 state the following:

	a.  Items 4 (a and b) (Grade, Rate or Rank and Pay Grade) states to enter the active duty grade or rank and pay grade at the time of separation.

	b.  Item 11 (Primary Specialty) states to enter the primary MOS or area of concentration (AOC), and all additional MOS/AOC served for a period of 1 year or more, during the Soldier’s continuous active military service.  For each MOS/AOC, list the title with the years and months served.

	c.  Item 14 (Military Education) states to list formal in-service (full-time attendance) training courses successfully completed during the period of service covered by title, length in weeks, and month and year completed.

BOARD DISCUSSION:

1.  The Board carefully considered the applicant’s request, supporting documents, evidence in the record, the medical advisory opinion and published DoD guidance for consideration of discharge upgrade requests.  The Board discussed each of the applicant’s issues as follows:  

a. The Board considered his period of service and determined that his separation was initiated prior to him reaching 180 days of service resulting him still being in an entry level status.  An Uncharacterized discharge was not an error in his case.
b. The Board reviewed the applicant’s claim and the advisory opinion and concurred with the advising official’s determination that he did not meet medical retention standards and that his condition Existed Prior to Service (EPTS).  The Board determined that there was no condition that would have resulted in a disability separation.
c. The Board determined that the available evidence shows that he completed the 63B (Light Wheeled Mechanic) military education course and that he should be awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 63B. 
d. The Board discussed the policy pertaining to individuals being eligible for promotion, to include the required time in service, when they have received notification of separation proceedings and determined that the applicant was not eligible to be promoted to private enlisted two (PV2)/E-2 prior to his separation. 

2.  After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found that partial relief was warranted.

BOARD VOTE:

Mbr 1	Mbr 2	Mbr 3

:		:	:	GRANT FULL RELIEF

:X		:X	:X	GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

:		:	:	GRANT FORMAL HEARING

:		:	:	DENY APPLICATION


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 for the period of service ending 26 July 1999 to reflect his completion of the Light Wheel Vehicle Mechanic Course 610-63B on 22 June 1999 and award of military occupation specialty (MOS) 63B. 

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 correcting his rank/grade to PV2/E2, changing his character of service or narrative reason for separation upgrading the characterization of his discharge under other than honorable conditions.
  


		 
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.


ADMINISTRATIVE NOTE(S):

Records show the applicant completed the 10-week Light Wheel Vehicle Mechanic Course on 22 June 1999, which is not reflected in item 14 (Military Education) of his 
DD Form 214.  Item 14 should reflect:  //LIGHT WHEEL VEHICLE MECHANIC COURSE, 10 WEEKS, JUN 1999//NOTHING FOLLOWS


REFERENCES:

1.  Title 10, U.S. Code, chapter 61, provides the Secretaries of the Military Departments with authority to retire or discharge a member if they find the member unfit to perform military duties because of physical disability.  The U.S. Army Physical Disability Agency is responsible for administering the Army physical disability evaluation system and executes Secretary of the Army decision-making authority as directed by Congress in chapter 61 and in accordance with Department of Defense Directive 1332.18 and Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation).

2.  Army Regulation 635-40 establishes the Army Disability Evaluation System and sets forth policies, responsibilities, and procedures that apply in determining whether a Soldier is unfit because of physical disability to reasonably perform the duties of his office, grade, rank, or rating.  Only the unfitting conditions or defects and those which contribute to unfitness will be considered in arriving at the rated degree of incapacity warranting retirement or separation for disability.

	a.  Soldiers are referred to the disability system when they no longer meet medical retention standards in accordance with Army Regulation 40-501, chapter 3, as evidenced in a medical evaluation board (MEB); when they receive a permanent physical profile rating of "3" or "4" in any functional capacity factor and are referred by a Military Occupational Specialty Medical Retention Board; and/or they are command-referred for a fitness-for-duty medical examination.

	b.  The disability evaluation assessment process involves two distinct stages: 
the MEB and physical evaluation board (PEB).  The purpose of the MEB is to determine whether the service member's injury or illness is severe enough to compromise his or her ability to return to full duty based on the job specialty designation of the branch of service.  A PEB is an administrative body possessing the authority to determine whether a service member is fit for duty.  A designation of "unfit for duty" is required before an individual can be separated from the military because of an injury or medical condition.  Service members who are determined to be unfit for duty due to disability are either separated from the military or are permanently retired, depending on the severity of the disability and length of military service.  Individuals who are "separated" receive a one-time severance payment, while veterans who retire based upon disability receive monthly military retired pay and have access to all other benefits afforded to military retirees.

	c.  The mere presence of medical impairment does not in and of itself justify a finding of unfitness.  In each case, it is necessary to compare the nature and degree of physical disability present with the requirements of the duties the Soldier may reasonably be expected to perform because of his or her office, grade, rank, or rating.  Reasonable performance of the preponderance of duties will invariably result in a finding of fitness for continued duty.  A Soldier is physically unfit when medical impairment prevents reasonable performance of the duties required of the Soldier's office, grade, rank, or rating.

	d.  Paragraph 3-2 states disability compensation is not an entitlement acquired by reason of service-incurred illness or injury; rather, it is provided to Soldiers whose service is interrupted and who can no longer continue to reasonably perform because of a physical disability incurred or aggravated in military service.

	e.  Chapter 5 contains guidance on the separation of enlisted members for non-service aggravated EPTS conditions when the Soldier requests a waiver of a PEB.  The case must meet the following conditions:

* Soldier is eligible for referral into the disability system
* Soldier does not meet medical retention standards
* the disqualifying defect or condition existed prior to entry on current period of duty and has not been aggravated by such duty
* 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

	f.  Unless otherwise indicated the Soldier will be issued an Honorable discharge Certificate or a General Discharge Certificate.  If the Soldier is in entry level status at the time of processing, the DD Form 214 may describe service as uncharacterized.

4.  Title 38, U.S. Code, sections 1110 and 1131, permits the VA to award compensation for disabilities that 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 VA does not have the 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.  These two government agencies operate under different policies.  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.

5.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.

	a.  Paragraph 5-1 states unless the reason for separation requires a specific characterization, a Soldier being separated for the convenience of the government will be awarded a character of service of honorable, under honorable conditions, or an uncharacterized description of service if in an entry-level status.

	b.  Paragraph 5-11 states Soldiers who were not medically qualified under procurement medical fitness standards when accepted for enlistment or who became medically disqualified under these standards prior to entry on active duty or active duty for training for initial entry training may be separated.  Such conditions must be discovered during the first 6 months of active duty.  For character of service, paragraph 5-1 should be adhered to.

	c.  Section II (Terms) of the Glossary defines entry-level status for Regular Army Soldiers as the first 180 days of continuous active duty or the first 180 days of continuous active duty following a break of more than 92 days of active military service.

6.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Personnel Separations – Separation Documents), in effect at the time, prescribed the separation documents prepared for Soldiers upon retirement, discharge, or release from active military service or control of the Army.  The instructions for completion of the DD Form 214 state the following:

	a.  Items 4 (a and b) (Grade, Rate or Rank and Pay Grade) states to enter the active duty grade or rank and pay grade at the time of separation.

	b.  Item 11 (Primary Specialty) states to enter the primary MOS or area of concentration (AOC), and all additional MOS/AOC served for a period of 1 year or more, during the Soldier’s continuous active military service.  For each MOS/AOC, list the title with the years and months served.

	c.  Item 14 (Military Education) states to list formal in-service (full-time attendance) training courses successfully completed during the period of service covered by title, length in weeks, and month and year completed.

7.  Army Regulation 600-8-19 (Enlisted Promotions and Reductions) prescribes policies and procedures governing promotions and reduction of Army enlisted personnel.  It states eligibility criteria for automatic (Regular Army and U.S. Army Reserve) or immediate (Army National Guard) promotion to PV2 is 6 months’ time in service.  If a commander elects not to recommend a Soldier for promotion on the automatic date, the commander must annotate “no” on the Enlisted Advancement Report (AAA-117).

8.  Army Regulation 15-185 (Army Board for Correction of Military Records) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army acting through the ABCMR.  The ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity.  The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence.  

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)	 AR20160013742


2


1