RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:                 29 JUNE 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:         AR2005000012554


      I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record
of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in
the case of the above-named individual.

|     |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun               |     |Director             |
|     |Ms. Richard J. Eisenbart          |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Ms. Linda Simmons                 |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Richard Sayre                 |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Chester Damian                |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests a physical disability retirement instead of a
total years of service (longevity) Non-Regular (Reserve) retirement.

2.  The applicant states that he should have been medically retired from
the Arkansas Army National Guard because of what took place with him while
he served on active duty, while mobilized in support of Operation Iraqi
Freedom, during period 05 December 2003 through 26 June 2004.  He states
that during his period of active duty in Iraq he developed medical problems
to the point where his health was deteriorating rapidly.  He was determined
to be non-mission capable, requiring redeployment from the Theater of
Operations and returned to his mobilization station (Fort Hood, Texas) for
further medical evaluation.  The applicant states that upon his return to
Fort Hood, Texas, that no one knew what to do with him.  He states that the
option of attachment to a medical holdover element for follow-on medical
treatment was not properly explained to him.  He also states that he was
told that he could sign a waiver to return home and receive medical care at
any local Veterans Affairs hospital, or from his private physician.  The
applicant indicates that during this waiting period he registered with, and
began to receive care from the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) health
care system.  He also states that in addition to the DVA care, he sought
care from his private physician to try and gain control of his life.  He
states that he was erroneously released from active duty and returned to
the control of the Arkansas Army National Guard (ARARNG) instead of being
medically retired.

3.  The applicant provides in support of his application a self-authored
handwritten letter and copies of various documents from his Official
Military Personnel File (OMPF).  No clinical documentation was provided in
the available record.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged injustice which
occurred on 1 June 2005.  The application submitted in this case was
received on
18 August 2005.

2.  There were no enlistment or reenlistment documents provided with the
applicant’s DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Records).
Review of the applicant’s National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form 23A (Army
National Guard Current Annual Statement), a summary statement of non-
regular and regular service recording retirement points earned, indicates
that the applicant served on active duty (regular service) in the United
States Navy from 17 October 1972 to
16 October 1975.  He served in the United States Navy Reserve (non-regular
service) from 17 October 1975 to 3 June 1986.  No DD Form 214 (Certificate
of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) for either of these periods of
service was provided with the application; therefore, it is reasonable to
presume that the character of service for these periods was honorable and
the reason for separation was sufficient to allow reentry into military
service.  The applicant’s NGB Form 23A indicates a non-military, civilian
break in service, from
4 June 1986 to 24 February 1987.  His NGB Form 23A, indicates that the
applicant reentered non-regular service in the Army National Guard (ARNG)
on 25 February 1987, serving in the ARARNG until his transfer to the
Retired Reserve on 1 June 2005 in pay grade E-5.

3.  While serving in the ARARNG, the applicant’s NGB Form 23A indicates two
periods of service on active duty (mobilization), 25 January 1991 to 26
March 1991, in support of Operation Desert Shield/Storm, and 5 December
2003 to
26 June 2004, in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

4.  There is no documentation (SF 88 or DD Form 2808, Report of Medical
Examination and/or SF 93 or DD Form 2807, Report of Medical History or DA
Form 7349, Initial Medical Review-Annual Medical Certificate) in the
available records reflecting the applicant’s state of health at the time of
his initial enlistment in the ARNG, or during his non-regular service.
Additionally, there is no documentation (DD Form 2795, Pre-Deployment
Health Assessment) in the available records reflecting the applicant’s
state of health during the conduct of pre-deployment Soldier Readiness
Processing (SRP), or a waiver of the SRP requirement.  Army Regulation (AR)
40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness), Chapter 8 (Medical Examinations-
Administrative Procedures), Paragraph 8-18 (Mobilization of units and
members of the Reserve Components of the Army) states that:  “A current
periodic medical examination or a new medical examination is not required
incident to mobilization or call-up for war or contingency operations.”

5.  On 3 December 2003, the applicant was ordered to active duty, under
Presidential authority for the Partial Mobilization of the National Guard
and Reserve forces, for a period of active duty not to exceed 545 days in
support of Operation Iraqi Freedom.  He was ordered to report to his unit
home station at Camp Robinson, Arkansas on 5 December 2003.  Subsequently,
his unit was ordered to report to their mobilization station at Fort Hood,
Texas on
5 December 2003.  There is no evidence in the available records to indicate
anything other than compliance of the aforementioned orders by the
applicant.  The unit’s date of departure from Fort Hood, Texas or date of
arrival in Iraq are not indicated in the documentation provided with the
record.

6.  On 20 May 2004, the applicant was evaluated by the Task Force (TF)
Flight Surgeon and was found to have significant health problems that
seemed to be worsening during his deployment to Iraq.  There is no
documentation in the available record indicating any incident or incidents
occurring which precipitated the necessity for a medical evaluation, or the
authority directing it.  In memoranda to the applicant’s unit commander,
dated 20 May 2004, the TF Flight Surgeon presented the following diagnosis
and observations pertaining to the applicant’s medical condition:  previous
diagnoses of hypertension as well as hyperlipidemia (an elevation of lipids
in the bloodstream); hypertension remains uncontrolled despite the use of
four different anti-hypertensive medications; a significant difference in
ECG (electrocardiogram) tracing test results from
6 August 1994 through 7 March 1999; evidence of abnormal treadmill stress
test results on 30 December 1999; and blood analysis results from 4
November 2003 indicating an elevated glucose level requiring further
evaluation for potential existence of diabetes.  The examining physician
offered the opinion that the applicant’s medical condition presented a
significant risk of injury while deployed.

7.  On 20 May 2004, the unit commander formally requested that the
applicant be redeployed as soon as possible.  On 22 May 2004, the
applicant’s battalion commander formally requested the applicant’s release
from the Theater of Operations and redeployment to his Home Station.  The
TF commander released the applicant from duty in the Central Command
(CENTCOM) Area of Responsibility (AOR) and directed his redeployment to the
Mobilization Station at Fort Hood, Texas.  The exact date of the
applicant’s redeployment from Iraq, or his arrival at Fort Hood, Texas are
not indicated in the available record.

8.  A staff member of the Board contacted the Office of the Deputy State
Surgeon, ARARNG, in reference to the applicant’s contentions.  The Deputy
State Surgeon indicated that the applicant had declined medical care at the
Mobilization Station and requested Release from Active Duty (REFRAD).
Again, no evidence of a waiver exists in the available record.

9.  Subsequently, the applicant was REFRAD, under Headquarters III Corps
Orders 159-0217, “not by reason of physical disability” and reassigned to
Camp Robinson, Arkansas on 7 June 2004.  A Department of Defense (DD) Form
214 was provided to the applicant with an effective date of REFRAD of 26
June 2004. It is pertinent to bring attention to the additional
instructions in the applicant’s REFRAD orders: “b. Soldier is eligible for
Transitional Health Care under
10 USC, Section 1145, until 23 DEC 2004.”  Transitional Health Care for
separating Soldier’s is officially referred to by the Military Health
System/TRICARE as the Transitional Assistance Management Program (TAMP).
TAMP offers transitional TRICARE coverage to certain separating active duty
members and their eligible family members.  Care is available for a limited
time.  The applicant and his family member’s eligibility for TAMP Health
Care benefits ended on 23 December 2004.  There is no evidence in the
available record which indicates whether the applicant or his family
members used or sought the use of these TAMP health care benefits.

10.  On 4 March 2005, the applicant’s private physician examined him and
provided the opinion that his health problems were inter-related to Post-
Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).  The available records do not indicate
that problems from PTSD were ever mentioned during the conduct of the
applicant’s fitness for duty evaluation.

11.  On 15 April 2005, a State Medical Review Board referred the
applicant’s case to the State Surgeon’s Office for the conduct of a medical
profile board/ fitness for duty evaluation board.  On 11 May 2005, a
medical profile board found the applicant to be unfit for retention, and he
was given a permanent (P4) profile for his hypertension and diabetes, per
AR 40-501, Chapter 3 (Medical Fitness Standards for Retention and
Separation, including Retirement).  Paragraphs
3-11d and 3-23 indicate as follows:  “3-11d, Endocrine and Metabolic
Disorders-Diabetes Mellitus when proven to require insulin or oral
medications for control”, and “3-23, Miscellaneous Cardiovascular
Conditions.”  The available records do contain a Department of the Army
(DA) Form 3348 (Physical Profile) with an effective date and/or official
signature date that conflicts with the chronological order of the other
case documents (16 April 2005).  The medical profile board/ fitness for
duty evaluation board, according to correspondence with the ARARNG Deputy
State Surgeon, determined that the applicant’s hypertension and diabetes
existed prior to service (EPTS).

12.  Accordingly the applicant was provided with a Notification of Medical
Disqualification, dated 11 May 2005, and given three options of
disposition: Discharge; Transfer to the Retired Reserve, if eligible, or;
further review by a
Non-Duty related Physical Evaluation Board.  The applicant was given a
suspense date of 11 June 2005 to indicate his option choice.  There is no
evidence in the available record indicating the applicant’s option choice.


13.  The record provides a memorandum from the Military Department of
Arkansas, Office of the Adjutant General (TAG), dated 11 May 2005,
directing the applicant and spouse (if married) to attend a “Reserve
Retirement and Survivor’s Benefits Briefing.”  The record also contains an
NGB Form 22, with an effective date of 1 June 2005, indicating transfer of
the applicant to the Retired Reserve.  A TAG order, dated 10 June 2005,
indicates honorable discharge from the Army National Guard and transfer to
the Retired Reserve.  Also present in the record is a TAG notification of
20 Years of Satisfactory Service for retired pay and Notification of
Eligibility for Retired Pay at Age 60, both dated 17 July 2005.  He had
served 31 years, 10 months, and 24 days of total service for pay, with
21 years of creditable service toward a “Non-Regular (Reserve) Retirement
and Retired Pay at Age 60.”

14.  National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-200, Chapter 8 (Discharge),
Paragraph 26 (Discharge from State ARNG and/or Reserve of the Army) in
effect at the time (dated 1 March 1997), established policy and provided
guidance for the discharge of enlisted personnel from State ARNG and/or the
Reserve of the Army service when determined to be:  “(1) Medically unfit
for retention per AR 40-501, Chapter 3”.   It directs that the discharge
will indicate Honorable service with a re-enlistment eligibility code of RE
3, and an NGB Form 55b (Honorable Discharge from the Federally Recognized
ARNG to Retired Reserve) will be issued.  The available records do not
contain any documentation indicating anything other that this prescribed
procedure being adhered to.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s discharge from the Army National Guard and subsequent
transfer to the Retired Reserve, under the provisions of NGR 600-200,
Chapter 8 and AR 40-501, Chapter 3, appears to have been administered
correctly with no indication of any violations of the applicant’s rights.

2.  The applicant’s contention that the option of assignment to a Medical
Holdover status at the Mobilization Station for follow-on treatment as not
being properly explained to him is duly noted.  His contention that he was
informed that he could sign a waiver to return home and receive follow-on
care from the Department of Veterans Affairs is also duly noted, as is the
chronological discrepancy on the applicant’s DA Form 3348 (Physical
Profile).  However, there is no evidence in the available OMPF documents
provided for the record, nor has the applicant provided any additional
evidence to support his claim that he should have been medically retired.

3.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the
applicant's request.



BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___LS    _  ___RS       ___CD __  DENY APPLICATION


BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable
error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall
merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the
records of the individual concerned.




                                  _____Linda Simmons______
                                            CHAIRPERSON
                                    INDEX
|CASE ID                 |AR20050012554                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20060629                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |20050601                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |NGR 600-200, Para 8-26j(1)/AR 40-501,   |
|                        |Para 3-11d & 3-23/AR 135-178 Para 1-8   |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |RET/MED UNFIT FOR RETENTION             |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |AR 15-185                               |
|ISSUES         1. 338   |136.0000/RETIREMENT SEPARATION          |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |











































-----------------------
[pic]