BOARD DATE: 17 April 2020 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20180013556 APPLICANT REQUESTS: correction to his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show he was medically separated vice separated for failing to meet medical fitness standards. APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * Standard Form (SF) 93 (Report of Medical History) dated 29 July 1987 * SF 88 (Report of Medical Examination) dated 29 July 1987 * SF 513 (Consultation Sheet) dated 12 August 1987 * U.S. Military Entrance Processing Command (USMEPCOM) Form 88 dated 12 August 1987 * DA Form 5181 (Screening Noted of Acute Medical Care) dated 26 February 1988 * SF 600 (Chronological Record of Medical Care) dated 10 May 1988 * SF 600 dated 16 May 1988 * DA Form 3349 (Physical Profile) dated 18 May 1988 * DA Form 4707 (Entrance Physical Standards Board Proceedings) dated 26 May 1988 with supporting evidence * Radiograph Report * Voluntary Medical Examination for Separation Statement of Option dated 8 June 1988 * miscellaneous medical records * SF 600 – shaving profile * SF 605 (Dental Examination) * SF 601 (Immunization Record) * DA Form 5570 (Health Questionnaire for Dental Treatment) * SF 545 (Laboratory Report) * DD Form 214 for the period ending 8 June 1988 * VA Form 70-3101-4 (Request for Information) dated 5 August 1988 FACTS: 1. The applicant did not file within the three year time frame provided in Title 10, United States Code, section 1552(b); however, the 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 through his Member of Congress that his DD Form 214 is incorrect and it was not properly completed at the time of his separation. He had to leave the U.S. Army for an injury he incurred while performing physical fitness training during basic combat training. He states the error on his DD Form 214 prevents him from obtaining benefits administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) because the VA does not think his injury is service-connected. He also alleges he did not receive a separation physical prior to his discharge from active duty. 3. In preparation for enlisting in the U.S. Army, the applicant completed SF 93 wherein he indicated that he had surgery, was a patient in a hospital and was treated by physicians in the past 5 years. He stated he had knee surgery in 1985 due to a knee injury. A medical provider noted on the SF 93 that the applicant had two surgeries on his left knee in November 1985 and in February 1986 to repair a torn patellar tendon by using screws. On 29 July 1987, a medical doctor signed and dated the form. 4. Concurrent with completing the SF 93, the medical doctor also conducted a medical examination recording his results on SF 88. The applicant was 22 years old and had surgical scars on his left knee. He referred the applicant to an orthopedic clinic for further evaluation. An SF 513 was completed wherein the applicant stated he injured his left knee playing football and tore his patellar tendon which was surgically repaired. The applicant denied he was in pain or that he had problems with his left knee. He stated he was active without limitations. The orthopedist stated the applicant’s range of motion was from zero to 140 degrees with no joint effusion and no joint line tenderness. There was no ligamentous disability and no patellar crepitus. There was no instability and his quadriceps strength was good. He concluded by stating after surgery there was no clinical orthopedic disability. The medical doctor finalized his physical examination stating the applicant was qualified for enlistment in the Regular Army. The applicant had no physical profile limitations. 5. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 21 January 1988. 6. On 26 February 1988 the applicant was seen at a troop medical clinic for a right sore ankle which occurred approximately 4 weeks earlier. The medical provider stated the applicant was running when he inverted his foot. The right foot was x-rayed and he received Motrin and a temporary physical profile for 1 week. The applicant stated the Motrin did not provide pain relief. On or about 25 February 1988 during a road march the applicant again introverted his right ankle spraining it. He received a temporary profile for 5 days limiting his ability to run, jump or march. On 10 May 1988 the applicant again sought medical treatment due to pain in his left knee. The applicant stated to a medical specialist that his left knee would buckle on him. He acknowledged he had injured his left knee and he had two left knee surgeries prior to his enlistment. During basic training (low crawling) his left knee started to bother him again. Upon examination his range of motion was zero to 95 degrees. He was referred to a medical doctor by personnel at the troop medical clinic. A radiologist completed her examination stating there was no fracture, no dislocation and no effusions identified in the radiological report. Her impression there was no acute osseous pathology. 7. On 16 May 1988, he was examined by a medical doctor who recorded his findings on a SF 600. He restated the applicant’s medical history and his current medical condition of a sore patella. The medical doctor stated it was his impression that the applicant had injured his left patellar ligament or that he had chondromalacia patellae (inflammation of the underside of the patella). He concluded by stating the applicant was unfit for duty under the provisions of Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness), paragraph 2-10c(4). 8. The applicant’s medical record underwent an Entrance Physical Standards Board wherein a medical doctor identified the applicant’s injuries to his left knee rupturing his left patella ligament which required surgical repair in November 1986. Within 3 months, the applicant re-injured his left knee and he underwent a second surgery to repair his left patella ligament. The applicant began having pain during his third week of basic training with swelling and instability. He passed his Army Physical Fitness Test and completed basic combat training. He relocated to Fort Sam Houston, Texas for advanced individual training on 24 March 1988. On 8 May 1988 he experienced severe pain, swelling and giving way (buckling) causing him to fall several times. He was evaluated on 10 May 1988 and again on 18 May 1988 by an orthopedist who found him unfit for military service because he was not able to satisfactorily perform the duty requirements of soldiering. The diagnosis was status post rupture of left ligament patella (twice) which existed prior to service and was not service aggravated. The orthopedist recommended separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 5, paragraph 5-11. 9. On 18 May 1988 the applicant’s orthopedist completed DA Form 3349 issuing the applicant a permanent physical profile showing his lower extremities factor was rated a "3" due to status post rupture of left patella ligament (prior to enlistment). His limitations included no mandatory physical training and no running. A senior medical doctor approved the physical profile the same day. 10. On 25 May 1988 the Deputy Commander for Clinical Services at Brooke Army Medical Center, Fort Sam Houston, Texas signed the DA Form 4707 recommending the applicant’s discharge prior to his expiration of term of service and forwarded it to the applicant’s company commander. A memorandum of transmittal was prepared on 26 May 1988 forwarding the board’s recommendation to the applicant’s chain of command. 11. On 1 June 1988 the applicant signed the DA Form 4707 stating he concurred with the board proceedings and he requested discharge from the U.S. Army without delay. 12. On 8 June 1988 the applicant signed a statement stating he did not desire a separation medical examination under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-10 (Processing Personnel for Separation). A medical doctor cosigned the applicant’s statement. 13. On 8 June 1988 the applicant was discharged and issued a DD Form 214 documenting his service as follows: * Block 12a (Record of Service – Date Entered Active Duty) – 21 January 1988 * Block 12b (Separation Date this Period) – 8 June 1988 * Block 12c (Net Active Service this Period) – 4 months and 18 days * Block 24 (Characterization of Service) – Honorable * Block 25 (Separation Authority) – Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-11 * Block 26 (Separation Code) – JFT * Block 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) – Did not meet procurement medical fitness standards – no disability 14. The applicant provided additional evidence from his medical records including his shaving profile, immunization record, dental record, and laboratory reports. He also provided a VA document showing on 4 August 1988 the VA requested copies of his military service treatment and personnel records. 15. The Army Review Board Agency (ARBA) Medical Advisor reviewed the supporting documents submitted by the applicant including the ABCMR application as well as various medical and administrative records. Due to the time of the applicant’s service in the Army there are no records pertaining to this applicant in iPERMS, the Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA), Health Artifacts Image Management Solutions (HAIMS) or the VA's Joint Legacy Viewer (JLV) and made the following findings and recommendations: a. The applicant is requesting a medical retirement based on an injury he claimed occurred while he was in initial entry training. According to his application the injury he sustained occurred while he was jogging for physical training. According to the applicant’s DD 214 he entered the Army on 21 January 1988, and was separated on 8 June 1988. He did not complete his initial entry training, and was not MOS qualified at the time of his discharge. He did complete basic training, but the injury occurred while he was completing his advanced individual training. The narrative reason for separation states that the applicant did not meet procurement medical fitness standards, and he was separated IAW AR 635-200, paragraph 5-11 indicating that his injury resulted from a condition that existed prior to service (EPTS). Because his separation occurred prior to completion of 181 days of continuous active military service, and the applicant was still in an entry-level status at the time of separation, his characterization of discharge was appropriate. Medical records submitted by the applicant indicate that prior to entering the Army he had sustained an injury to his left knee requiring two separate surgeries in November 1985 and February 1986. This information is documented on his entrance physical dated 29 July 1987. On 26 February 1988 the applicant presented to sick call stating that he had injured his right ankle 4 weeks prior to presentation. He was treated conservatively and placed on temporary profile. On 10 May 1988 the applicant presented to sick call with pain in his left knee that began approximately one week prior while jogging for physical training. He was referred to Physical Therapy, Orthopedics, and again placed him on temporary profile. On 16 May 1988 he was evaluated by an Orthopedic Surgeon who concluded that the applicant’s knee pain was related to his prior knee injury and surgeries, and he actually did not meet entry criteria medically IAW AR 40-501, Chapter 2-10(4). The applicant was not MOS qualified at that time, and had been on Active Duty less than 180 days (4 months, 18 days) according to his DD 214. He was referred to an Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSB), and on 26 May 1988 the Board determined that his condition did in fact exist prior to service. b. Although the applicant indicated in his ABCMR application that he was separated from the Army due to an injury of his right knee, all medical documentation contained in the submitted records indicate that the injury involved the applicant’s left knee. Therefore, it is the opinion of the Agency Medical Advisor, based on the available records, that the applicant’s narrative reason for separation is accurate and there is no indication for the applicant’s record to be referred to the Disability Evaluation System (DES) for consideration for medical retirement. BOARD DISCUSSION: After reviewing the application, all supporting documents, and the evidence found within the military record, the Board found that relief was not warranted. The applicant’s contentions, the military record, and regulatory guidance were carefully considered. The Board also considered the review and findings of the medical advisor. Based upon a preponderance of the evidence, the Board agreed the applicant was referred to an Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSB), and on 26 May 1988 and a determination was made that his condition did in fact exist prior to service. The Board concluded there was insufficient evidence of an error or injustice which would warrant a change in the narrative reason for separation. 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. 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. REFERENCES: 1. Title 10, USC, 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 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. 2. Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation) in effect at the time, established the Army Physical Disability Evaluation System (PDES) and set forth policies, responsibilities, and procedures that applied in determining whether a Soldier was unfit because of physical disability to reasonably perform the duties of his office, grade, rank, or rating. The mere presence of 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. The Army must find that a service member is physically unfit to reasonably perform his or her duties and assign an appropriate disability rating before he or she can be medically retired or separated. 3. Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time, set policies, standards, and procedures to ensure the readiness and competency of the force while providing for the orderly administrative separation of Soldiers. Readiness is promoted by maintaining high standards of conduct and performance. Paragraph 5-11 provided for the separation of Soldiers who did not meet medical procurement medical fitness standards for enlistment or who became medically disqualified after entrance onto active duty within the initial 120 days of active duty service. Medical proceedings must establish that a medical condition was identified by appropriate military medical authority within 6 months of the Soldier’s initial entrance on active duty for the Regular Army or during active duty training for initial entry training for the U.S. Army National Guard and the U.S. Army Reserve. A Soldier will not be processed under these procedures if he/she has completed 180 days of active duty. a. The medical diagnosis would have permanently or temporarily disqualified her for entry into the military service or entry on active duty or active duty for training for initial entry training had it been detected at that time. b. No Soldier has a right to be retained under this paragraph. Soldiers not retained will be processed for separation. c. Soldiers can be retained by the separation authority if he or she determines, after considering the findings of an Entrance Physical Standards Board, that the Soldier’s disqualifying condition will not prevent the Soldier from performing satisfactorily throughout their period of enlistment. The board operates informally and reviews all applicable medical records. The purpose of the board is to document the medical condition(s) which existed prior to service and would have precluded induction or enlistment. The board will also note any changes in the Soldier’s physical condition since their entry onto active duty. A DA Form 4707 is used to record the board proceedings. The Soldier’s commander will counsel him as to their rights including the opportunity to consult with an attorney. d. Soldiers who do not meet the medical fitness standards for retention will be processed per Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation) and Army Regulation 40-501. e. 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 entry level status. A separation will be described as an entry level separation with service uncharacterized if processing is initiated while a Soldier is in entry level status. An entry level status is defined as the first 180 days of creditable continuous active duty or active duty for training of no more than 90 days. f. An honorable characterization of service may be awarded to a Soldier upon completion of their first enlistment period or the period for which called or ordered to active duty or active duty for training. 4. Army Regulation 40-501, in effect at the time, governed medical fitness standards for enlistment, induction, appointment, retention, and separation. Specifically chapter 2 prescribes the medical conditions and physical defects which are causes for rejection for military service. Paragraph 2-10c (Lower extremities – leg, knee, thigh, and hip) subparagraph 2-10c(4) states history of surgical correction of knee ligament with evidence of more than mild instability of the knee ligaments in medial, lateral, or anteroposterior directions in comparison with a normal knee, weakness or atrophy of the this musculature in comparison with the normal side, or interference with the performance of military duties. 5. 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 regulation provides that 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. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20180013556 8 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1