ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 20 May 2019 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160015241 APPLICANT REQUESTS: Correction of her records to show she was separated due to a service connected physical disability. APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) * Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Rating Decision letter * magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the thoracic spine report, dated 12 March 2001 FACTS: 1. The applicant did not file within the three year time frame provided in Title 10, United States Code (USC), section 1552 (b); however, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) conducted a substantive review of this case and determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. 2. The applicant states: a. The discharge she was given in 2001 was "medical due to an injury prior to service" which is incorrect. She was awarded a service connected disability after her appeal with to the VA and was granted 20 percent disability rating in 2002. She herniated four discs and sprained her lumbar in the line of duty and she is currently 100 percent service connected disabled by the VA. She has been service connected disabled since 2002. b. She needs her discharge to state that she was discharged due to an injury and that it is a full medical discharge. Her current DD Form 214 states "existed prior to service" when she suffered the injury in a training obstacle course handling heavy jugs of water for the unit. She suffered a severe back injury and was discharged like it was a problem she already had. She suffered for a year without assistance or compensation until she could get some compensation by the VA. She was told she should have her discharge evaluated and change it. Her current discharge is affecting her ability to get a a. VA home loan when she is 100 percent service connected disabled and was discharged for the injury to her back upon completion of training. She should have been issued a line of duty document stating her injury was in the line of duty. 3. The applicant enlisted in the Massachusetts Army National Guard (MAARNG) on 26 April 2000. She entered initial active duty for training on 13 September 2000. 4. The applicant's DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record – Part II) shows she started basic combat training on 29 September 2000, advanced individual training on 12 January 2001, and that she was reassigned to the U.S. Army Transition Center, Fort Lee, VA, on 30 March 2001. 5. The applicant's DD Form 214 shows he was released from active duty and transferred to her MAARNG unit on 18 July 2001, under the authority of Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation), paragraph 4-24b(4) (Separation for physical disability without severance pay), by reason of disability, existed prior to service. 6. Orders issued by the MAARNG on 21 May 2002 directed the applicant's discharged from the ARNG effective 18 July 2001. The orders shows a separation code of "MI" (medically unfit at time of appointment). 7. The applicant provided a VA Rating Decision letter showing she was granted service connected disability compensation for lumbosacral strain and herniated discs, thoracic spine, with combined rating of 20 percent. 8. On 21 March 2019, the Army Review Boards Agency medical advisor provided an advisory opinion. The advisory found the applicant did not meet medical accession standards for her lumbosacral strain and herniated discs of the thoracic spine in accordance with Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness) and following the provisions set forth in Army Regulation 635-40 that were applicable to the applicant's era of service. There is no medical waiver for this condition and it was possibly not disclosed. The contention that this injury occurred while in initial entry training is not supported by any available documentation. There is no available evidence supporting a change to her narrative reason for separation. A copy of the complete medical advisory was provided to the Board for their review and consideration. 9. The applicant was provided a copy of the advisory opinion on 27 March 2019 and given an opportunity to submit comments. She did not respond. BOARD DISCUSSION: 1. The Board carefully considered the applicant’s request, supporting documents, the record and the advisory opinion. The Board noted the applicant’s statement and current Veteran’s Administration disability compensation as well as the advisory opinion based 1. on an evaluation of the available records. The Board determined that by preponderance of evidence the chronic condition for which she was discharged did not meet medical accession standards, existed prior to service and her discharge was appropriate. 2. After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found that relief was not warranted. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : 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 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. ADMINISTRATIVE NOTE(S): Not Applicable REFERENCES: 1. Title 10, USC, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within three years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law also allows the ABCMR to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the three-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. 2. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), in effect at the time of the applicant's active duty service, sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 5-11 stated that 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 entrance on active duty, active duty training, or initial entry training will be separated. A medical proceeding, regardless of the date completed, must establish that a medical condition was identified by appropriate medical authority within six months of the Soldier’s initial entrance on active duty, that the condition would have permanently or temporarily disqualified the Soldier for entry into the military service had it been detected at that time, and that the medical condition does not disqualify the Soldier from retention in the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 40-501, chapter 3. 3. Title 38, U.S. Code, sections 1110 and 1131, permit the VA to award compensation for medical conditions incurred in or aggravated by active military service. The VA, in accordance with its own policies and regulations, awards compensation solely on the basis that a medical condition exists and that said medical condition reduces or impairs the social or industrial adaptability of the individual concerned. Furthermore, the VA can evaluate a veteran throughout his or her lifetime, adjusting the percentage of disability based upon that agency's examinations and findings.