ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF:   BOARD DATE:  19 March 2020 DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20190001276 


APPLICANT REQUESTS:, in effect, that his record show the reason for his separation as "service connected disability" and his entitlement to special monthly compensation.  

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: 

.DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record)

.DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer orDischarge), for the period ending 22 April 1969

.Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Rating Decision, dated 6 June 2018



FACTS: 

1.The applicant did not file within the three year time frame provided in Title 10, UnitedStates Code, section 1552(b); however, the ABCMR conducted a substantive review ofthis case and determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure totimely file.

2.The applicant states his service record has been wrong since his discharge in 1969and that his DD Form 214 needs to be updated.

3.The applicant enlisted under the delayed entry program on 14 October 1968 andentered active duty service on 27 January 1969.  Subsequently, he was assigned toFort Gordon, Georgia for his initial entry training.

4.The applicant's records contain a Standard Form 88 (Report of MedicalExamination), dated 17 March 1969 that indicates he was given an examination by theU.S. Army Hospital Specialized Treatment Center, Fort Gordon, GA, for the purpose ofa medical board.  It shows he was not qualified for induction or enlistment as the resultof a diagnoses of hypogonadism, testicular.

5.A Standard Form 502 (Narrative Summary), dated 24 March 1969, shows he was inbasic training.  It further shows the applicant had failure of normal gonadal developmentwith resultant poor muscular development and muscular weakness.  The applicant was,


therefore, unable to perform duties required by the military.  The applicant's diagnosis was hypogonadism, testicular and it was characterized as being existed prior to service (EPTS).  The recommendation was, as a result of his hypogonadism and poor muscular development, he was unfit for induction under Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness), chapter 2, section VI, paragraph 2-8 (n).  He was fit for retention under Army Regulation 40-501, chapter 3.  It was noted therefore, the he should be separated from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel).    

6.DA Form 8-118 (Medical Board Proceedings), shows the applicant's records wereviewed and the board found the applicant medically fit for the diagnosis ofhypogonadism, testicular which was determined as an EPTS condition.

a.This form shows his physical condition as an abnormally decreased functionalactivity of the testes and the board recommended that he be separated from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200.   

b.The medical approving authority approved the findings of the board on 6 April1969 and the applicant was informed of the results on 11 April 1969. 

c.On a Fort Gordon (FG) Form 200-2R, the applicant was informed that his medicalcondition met retention medical fitness standards but did not meet procurement medical fitness standards at the time of enlistment.  He requested a separation from the service due to erroneous enlistment in accordance with paragraph 5-9, of Army Regulation  
635-200.

7.His immediate commander recommended his separation from the Army on
11 April 1969.  The separation approving authority directed his discharge from the Armyon 15 April 1969.

8.Special Orders Number 105 issued by Headquarters, U.S. Army School/TrainingCenter and Fort Gordon, dated 18 April 1969 discharged the applicant under theprovisions of Army Regulation 635-200 with a special program number (SPN) of 375,effective 22 April 1969.

9.The applicant's DD Form 214 shows he was discharged on 22 April 1969, under theprovisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted AdministrativeSeparations), chapter 5, section III, by SPN 375, by reason of discharge because of notmeeting medical fitness standards at time of enlistment.  His service was characterizedas honorable and severance pay was not authorized.  He completed 2 months and
26 days of net active service and was not awarded an MOS.

10.The applicant provides VA Rating Decision, dated 6 June 2018 that indicates hewas granted a service connected evaluation of 0 percent effective 16 September 2010.
It further noted he was entitled to special monthly compensation based on anatomical loss of creative organ effective 16 September 2010.   

BOARD DISCUSSION: 

After review of the application and all evidence, including the applicant’s statement, the Board determined there is insufficient evidence to grant relief.  The applicant attended IET and was on active duty for two months and 25 days before separating.  The applicant underwent a Medical Board on 17 March 1969, while in IET.  The Medical Board determined the applicant’s medical condition existed prior to service.  As such, the applicant’s DD Form 214 properly shows his narrative reason for separation as “Discharge because of not meeting medical fitness standards at time of enlistment,” with “Severance pay not authorized.”  The record is void of and the applicant did not provide sufficient evidence that the applicant’s preexisting condition was a service connected disability or that he should be entitled to special monthly compensation. 


BOARD VOTE: 

Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 

: : : GRANT FULL RELIEF 

: : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

: : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING 

:XX :XX :XX 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. 
REFERENCES: 

1.Title 10, United States Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications forcorrection 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 Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. 

2.According to the VA website, Special Monthly Compensation is a tax-free benefitpaid in addition to the regular VA Disability Compensation, to a veteran who, as a resultof military service, incurred the loss or loss of use of specific organs or extremities.Veterans can apply directly via the VA website.

3.Title 38, U.S. Code, permits the VA to award compensation for a medical conditionwhich was incurred in or aggravated by active military service.  The VA, however, is notrequired by law to determine medical unfitness for further military service.  The VA, inaccordance with its own policies and regulations, awards compensation solely on thebasis that a medical condition exists and that said medical condition reduces or impairsthe social or industrial adaptability of the individual concerned.  The VA can evaluate aveteran throughout his or her lifetime, adjusting the percentage of disability based uponthat agency’s examinations and findings.

4.Army Regulation 40-501, governs medical fitness standards for enlistment, induction,appointment, retention, and separation.  Chapter 2 provides for the physical standardsfor enlistment or induction.

5.Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time, sets policies, standards, andprocedures to insure the readiness and competency of the force while providing for theorderly administrative separation of Soldiers for a variety of reasons.  Chapter 5provided that Soldiers who were not medically qualified under procurement medicalfitness standards when accepted for enlistment or who became medically disqualifiedunder these standards prior to entrance on active duty, active duty for training, or initialentry training would be separated.  A medical proceeding, regardless of the datecompleted, must establish that a medical condition was identified by appropriatemedical authority within 6 months of the Soldier's initial entrance on active duty, that thecondition would have permanently or temporarily disqualified the Soldier for entry intomilitary service had it been detected at that time, and the medical condition did notdisqualify the Soldier from retention in the service under the provisions of ArmyRegulation 40-501.  The character of service for Soldiers separated under this provisionwould normally be honorable, but would be uncharacterized if the Soldier was in anentry-level status.

//NOTHING FOLLOWS//