| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Gale J. Thomas | Analyst |
| Mr. Fred N. Eichorn | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Walter T. Morrison | Member | |
| Mr. Christopher J. Prosser | Member |
2. The applicant requests that her discharge from the Army National Guard be changed to honorable or medical.
3. The applicant states that she was injured while on active duty for training, and should have been medically separated. In support of her request she submits copies of her medical records, her NGB Form 22 (National Guard Bureau Report of Separation and Record of Service), and her Department of Veterans Affairs disability decision.
4. The applicant’s military records show that she enlisted in the Puerto Rico Army National Guard on 23 October 1998.
5. On 16 April 1999, while on active duty for training she injured her left knee.
6. On 28 April 1999, a DA Form 2173 (Statement of Medical Examination and Duty Status) determined that the applicant’s injury was temporary, in the line of duty, with a diagnoses of left knee bursitis.
7. Documents provided by the applicant indicate she was evaluated on numerous occasions from April to June 1999, by military and civilian doctors for knee pain which resulted in several temporary physical profiles. It appears the applicant's medical evaluations ended in July 1999, with a recommendation of physical therapy with strengthening exercise to return her knee to full function. There is no additional medical documentation in the applicant's records.
8. The facts and circumstances concerning the applicant’s discharge are not in the available records, however, on 6 October 2000, she was discharged from the Army National Guard, under the provisions of National Guard Regulation 600-200, paragraph 8-26c, for entry level performance and conduct. Her NGB Form 22 indicates she had 1 year, 11 months and 14 days of service, and that her service was uncharacterized.
9. Subsequent to her discharge, on 10 April 2001, the Department of Veterans Affairs awarded her a 30 percent disability rating for residual left knee injury-prepatellar bursitis.
10. On 21 June 2001, an advisory opinion was obtained from the Board's Medical Staff, which states that the applicant’s military medical documentation ends in July 1999, and that there is no documentation in her records of her problem being permanent or disqualifying. They concluded that although the applicant suffered an injury while on active duty there was nothing in her records to support the claim that the injury was the cause of her discharge. The mere fact of service connected disability payments from the VA does not support the claim for a Medical Discharge. The applicant was provided a copy of the advisory opinion and has not responded.
11. The Board received additional guidance from the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel, and the National Guard Bureau, Enlisted Policy Office, which recommended that if the Board elected to change the applicant’s characterization of service to honorable then the authority for her separation should be changed to secretarial authority, or for the convenience of the Government. The applicant was provided a copy of the recommendation and has not responded.
12. Army Regulation 135-178, states in pertinent part, that an individual will be separated while in an entry level status when they have completed no more than 180 days of continuous active military service by the date of separation, and that the individual's service will be uncharacterized.
13. Title 38, United States Code, sections 310 and 331, permits the VA to award compensation for a medical condition which was incurred in or aggravated by active military service. The VA, however, is not required by law to determine medical unfitness for further 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. Consequently, due to the two concepts involved, an individual's medical condition, although not considered medically unfitting for military service at the time of processing for separation, discharge or retirement, may be sufficient to qualify the individual for VA benefits based on an evaluation by that agency. Furthermore, 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.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. Although documents associated with the applicant’s entry level separation action are not in the files available to the Board, it is clear that she was separated well after her initial 180 days of service. It is possible that actions to administratively separate the applicant were initiated prior to her reaching 180 days of service, then suspended while she underwent medical treatment, and subsequently resurrected when her medical condition did not result in initiation of disability processing. However, the fact remains that the applicant had nearly
2 years of service at the time of her separation and as such it would be appropriate and in the interest of justice and equity to change her uncharacterized service to honorable, and the authority and reason to secretarial authority.
2. The evidence of record indicates she did not have any medically unfitting disability which required physical disability processing. Therefore, there is no basis for physical disability retirement or separation. The fact that she is receiving disability compensation from the VA is not a basis to change the basis for her separation nor grant her disability compensation from the military.
3. In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. That all of the Department of the Army record related to this case be corrected by showing that the individual concerned was separated from the Army National Guard on 6 October 2000 with an honorable discharge due to secretarial authority.
2. That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.
BOARD VOTE:
__FNE __ __WTM__ __CJP__ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
____Fred N. Eichorn_____
CHAIRPERSON
| CASE ID | AR2001058480 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020502 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | YYYYMMDD |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR . . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | GRANT |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 131.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110021758
The applicant states that when she returned home from basic training she started seeing a doctor for her knee pain. (2) She would be discharged from the USAR if she failed to complete the basic training program. Her record contains a DD Form 220 (Active Duty Report) which shows her effective date of entry on active duty was 5 June 2007 and the date she departed from her duty station to home was 18 August 2007, which resulted in being credited with 74 days of active duty service and...
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD-2012-01245
The NARSUM documented a normal neurological examination and ROM. The conditions adjudicated as not unfitting by the PEB and that were also contended by the CI are right foot pain secondary to pes planus, plantar fasciitis, and fractured 4th phalanx, right shoulder bursitis, bilateral knee osteoarthritis, and DDD of the cervical spine. An MRI of the left knee on 8 May 2006 (2 months prior to separation) was normal.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001061447C070421
On 30 June 1995 the California Army National Guard informed her that her medical records had been reviewed by a medical evaluation board (MEB) conducted from 1 April 1995 through 31 May 1995 and that the board found her unfit for retention in accordance with Army Regulation 40-501, chapter 3. In a 13 May 1999 advisory opinion regarding her 8 October 1997 application to this Board requesting a medical discharge, the Army Review Boards Medical Advisor noted that she had been discharged...
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012-00072
(2) is limited to those conditions which were determined by the PEB to be specifically unfitting for continued military service or, when requested by the CI, those conditions “identified but not determined to be unfitting by the PEB.” The back pain, depressive disorder, bilateral plantar fasciitis, bilateral retropatellar pain, migraine headaches and left wrist conditions meet the criteria prescribed in DoDI 6040.44 for Board purview. The Board then considered the disability rating for the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040010024C070208
A 17 August 1999 memorandum from the Medical Department Activity indicates that because of her medical condition, left hip stress fracture, she was unable to perform her normal military duties from 16 August 1999 to 23 August 1999 in accordance with the provisions of her profile. A Soldier may be discharged or retired because of medical reasons, e.g., medically unfit for retention, as in the applicant’s case; however, the character of service, honorable, under honorable conditions, etc., is...
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00190
The Board must apply separate codes and ratings in its recommendations if compensable ratings for each condition are achieved IAW VASRD §4.71a. An orthopedic examination three and one half months prior to separation, noted that she had “subjective” pain, and documented an essentially normal exam. As previously elaborated, the Board must first consider whether the left or right hip pain condition remained separately unfitting, having de-coupled it from a combined PEB adjudication.
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01247
The PEBadjudicated chronic anterior knee pain, s/p left knee arthroscopic lateral retinacular release for lateral patellar compression syndrome as unfitting, rated 10%with likely application of SECNAVINST 1850.4E/Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).The remaining conditions, coxa saltans of the left hip and left greater trochanteric bursitis were determined to be Category III, conditions that are not separately unfitting and do not contribute to the unfitting condition. ...
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00684
The PEB adjudicated the multidirectional instability right shoulder condition as unfitting, rated 20% IAW the Veterans Administration Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). Right Shoulder Condition . Board members agreed that the 20% rating assigned by the PEB was well-supported by the evidence, and that there was no justification for a higher rating under the 5202 code.
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00478
The PEB adjudicated the left knee condition as unfitting, rated 0%, with application of the US Army Physical Disability Agency (USAPDA) pain policy. Left knee Pain Condition . Service treatment records also do not show evidence to suggest MS symptoms were present prior to separation.
AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-01932
The low back and left knee conditions, characterized as “chronic low back pain” and “patellofemoral pain/chondromalacia patella, left knee,” were forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501.Hypertension and bunionectomy conditions were submitted by the MEB as medically acceptable.The Informal PEB adjudicated “chronic low back pain (LBP) and chronic pain of the left knee”as unfitting, rated 10% and 0% respectively, with likely application of the VA Schedule for Rating...