Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080017959
Original file (20080017959.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  	  16 April 2009

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080017959 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests, in effect, that his uncharacterized discharge be upgraded to a medical discharge.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he was issued his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) prior to his discharge from the US Army for a medical condition.  

3.  The applicant provides a copy of a DD Form 214, a copy of Orders Number D253-27, dated 19 December 1989, and a copy of a memorandum from the US Total Army Personnel Command (now know as the Human Resources Command) in support of his application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Title 10, U.S. Code, 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 Army Board for Correction of Military Records (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.  While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.
2.  The applicant's record shows he enlisted in the United States Army Reserve (USAR) for a period of 8 years.  On 3 March 1988, he was ordered to active duty for the purpose of completing initial active duty for training (IADT).

3.  The applicant's records do not contain any documentation which shows that the applicant was seen by medical authorities or was recommended to appear before medical board for any medical problems while he was on active duty.  

4.  On 29 June 1988, the applicant was relieved from IADT and transferred to his Reserve unit, the 597th Supply Company, Fort Buchanan, Puerto Rico, after completing a total of 3 months and 27 days active military service. 

5.  The applicant's record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 which was authenticated by the applicant’s signature.  Item 12b (Separation Date this Period) of the applicant's DD Form 214 shows he was separated from active duty on 29 June 1988.  Item 23 (Type of Separation) shows he was relieved from ADT. Item 24 (Character of Service) shows that his character of service was "uncharacterized."  Item 25 shows that the applicant was released from ADT under the provisions of Paragraph 4-2, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of expiration term of service.  

6.  The applicant's record's contains an Optional Form 275 (Medical Report) dated 25 May 1989, which states that the applicant was an Army Reservist who sustained an injury to his lower back with radiation to the left lower extremity consistent with the diagnosis of herniated nucleus pulposus.  The medical reports states the applicant was seen at the Eisenhower Army Hospital in September 1988 and while there underwent an L5-S1 discectomy.  The medical report states that the applicant was unable to return to duty after approximately 4 months and the subjective complaints were disproportionate to physical findings; therefore, he elected to appear before a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). 

7.  On 29 May 1989, the applicant underwent an MEB for lower back pain, status post successful left L5-S1 discectomy, minimal residual left S1 radiculopathy as exhibited by absent left ankle jerk; and subjective low back pain disproportionate to objective findings consistent with symptoms amplification.  The MEB recommended the applicant be referred to a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB).    

8.  On 13 December 1989, the PEB found that the applicant was physically unfit due to a intervertebral disk syndrome, status post discectomy, left L5-S1 in September 1988 with normal lumbar spine motion, no sciatic nerve radiculitis; with persisting back pain and post-operative absent ankle jerk.  The applicant was recommended for separation with severance pay and was granted a 20 percent disability rating.  The applicant concurred with the findings and recommendations of the board.
9.  The applicant submitted a copy of Orders Number D253-27, US Army Total Army Personnel Command, St. Louis, MO, dated 19 December 1989, which shows he was discharged honorably with severance pay, provided he had completed 6 months of active duty service from the USAR effective 4 January 1990, with a 20 percent disability rating.

10.  The applicant submitted a copy of a memorandum from the US Total Army Personnel Command, Alexandria, VA, dated 19 December 1989, which stated, in pertinent part, that the applicant was entitled to severance pay if he has completed at least 6 months of active duty service.  He was credited with 
00 years, 02 months, and 26 day of active duty service.  

11.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Personnel Separation-Separation Documents) prescribes the separation documents that must be prepared for Soldiers.  It states, in pertinent part, that a DD Form 214 will be prepared for all personnel at the time of their retirement, discharge or release from Active Army.  

12.  Army Regulation 635-40, (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation), provides that a Soldier may be separated with severance pay if the Soldier's disability is rated at less than 30 percent, if the Soldier has less than 
20 years of service as defined in 10 USC 1208 and if the Soldier's disability occurred in the line of duty and is the proximate result of performing active duty.

13.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 4, in pertinent part, provides for the separation or release from active duty upon termination of enlistment and other period of active duty or active duty for training.  Specifically, individuals of the USAR ordered to active duty who have completed less than 180 days of continuous active duty will have their service uncharacterized, even though they have completed IADT.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention that his discharge should be upgraded from an uncharacterized to a medical discharge was carefully considered and found to be without merit.

2.  The evidence of record shows that the applicant began medical treatment for back injuries after returning to his reserve unit.  The evidence of record also shows that the applicant was in an entry level status at the time of his release from ADT on 29 June 1988.  Since the applicant had not completed 180 days of active service he was given an entry level discharge and transferred back to his USAR unit.  The evidence of record shows that his characterization of service he was given was correct.  
3.  Therefore, his records are correct as currently constituted and there is no basis to change the applicant's character of service as requested.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  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 that 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.



ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080017959





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080017959



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD 2012 00946

    Original file (PD 2012 00946.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The PEB adjudicated the low back, bilateral knee and headaches conditions as unfitting, rated 10%, 0% and 0%, respectively, with application of Veteran’s Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). Both the PEB and the VA rated the CI’s bilateral knee condition at 0%. Both the MEB and the VA rated the CI’s migraine headache condition at 0%.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD-2012-00362

    Original file (PD-2012-00362.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It referred back to the MEB examination for the physical findings. On examination, he was noted to have normal gait and posture. Service Treatment Record Exhibit C. Department of Veterans’ Affairs Treatment Record SFMR‐RB XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, DAF President Physical Disability Board of Review MEMORANDUM FOR Commander, US Army Physical Disability Agency (TAPD‐ZB / XXXXXX), 2900 Crystal Drive, Suite 300, Arlington, VA 22202‐3557 SUBJECT: Department of Defense Physical Disability Board of Review...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD 2012 01587

    Original file (PD 2012 01587.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX CASE: PD1201587 BRANCH OF SERVICE: ARMY BOARD DATE: 20130411 SEPARATION DATE: 20020903 SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty SPC/E-4(74B/COMPUTER SPECIALIST) medically separated for a lumbar spine condition due to lumbar degenerative disc disease (DDD). ...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00525

    Original file (PD2009-00525.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    CI CONTENTION : The CI states: ‘VA rated disability at 40% Service connection on May 28, 1997 and considered me unemployable on 4-22-04 for the back condition military discharged me with at 10%. Follow-up for back pain. The frequency and severity of the CI’s back pain and radicular pain increased significantly during his time on TDRL and this was consistent with the increasing severity of degenerative disc disease and herniated discs with impingement on the right S1 nerve root documented...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-01462

    Original file (PD-2014-01462.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to review of medical records and all available evidence for application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. RATING COMPARISON : Service IPEB – Dated 20060331VA -(> 6 Years Post-Separation) ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Back Pain status post (S/P) L5-S1 Discectomy w/o Neurologic or Electrodiagnostic Abnormality...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00279

    Original file (PD2011-00279.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The CI mentioned left leg pain and left foot numbness in his contention. This review was performed 23 March 2009. All evidence considered there is not reasonable doubt in the CI’s favor supporting addition of the neurologic symptoms in left lower extremity, associated with the low back condition as an unfitting condition for separation rating.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01425

    Original file (PD-2013-01425.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Anesthesia consult pain clinic.”The CI underwent back surgery on 20 December 2002, 4 months after separation to decompress the left S1 nerve root. The CI noted constant lower back and “radicular pain of the left lower extremity extending to the foot, as well as paresthesias of the left foot only with stress,” the NARSUM noted some motor weakness in the left quadriceps (L4-5) and the neurosurgical note of 20 December 2002 stated “intractable left lower extremity pain” as the basis for going...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD-2012-01336

    Original file (PD-2012-01336.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Pre -Separation) – All Effective Date 20030416 Condition Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam Back Pain & Loss of Motion 5293-5299- 5292 20% S/p Laminectomy L4-5, L5-S1 5293-5292 40% 20030205 .No Additional MEB/PEB Entries. At the MEB exam, the NARSUM, 24 October 2002, noted “gradual improvement of pain,” but with “persistent difficulties with bending, stooping, lifting and running.” The MEB physical exam noted that the “general physical examination is within normal limits.” The NARSUM...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD 2012 01279

    Original file (PD 2012 01279.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Ratings for unfitting conditions will be reviewed in all cases. RATING COMPARISON: Service Admin IPEB – Dated 20021212 VA - (6 days Post-Separation) Condition Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam Chronic Low Back Pain 5295 10% S/P Laminectomy and Diskectomy L-5, S1 w/DDD 5292 40%* 20030609 LLE Radiculopathy Associated w/ S/P Laminectomy and Diskectomy L-5, S1 w/DDD 8599-8520 10% 20030609 Mild High Frequency Hearing loss Not Unfitting Bilateral High Frequency Hearing Loss Not Service...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050003063C070206

    Original file (20050003063C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 31 March 2004, an informal PEB found the applicant unfit for duty under the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) code 5243 (Intevertebral Disc Syndrome based on incapacitating episodes) as a result of chronic low back pain post L5/S1 laminectomy and discectomy with decreased range of motion due to pain. A 3 May 2004 initial consultation from Doctor D___ at Neurology Associates, LLC, indicated the applicant had a history of pain of his back status post surgery at the...