IN THE CASE OF:	 

		BOARD DATE:	    6 November 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110021758 


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, correction of her character of service from uncharacterized to honorable and correction of her narrative reason for separation from entry-level status to physical disability.

2.  The applicant states she should have received a medical discharge due to a flair up of plica syndrome from stress to her left knee during basic training which ultimately required surgery.  She further states she joined the military to better her life and to serve her country.  She had difficulty in basic training, but pushed herself to do her best.  She contends her knee pain started while attending basic training; she knew she was doing much more than she was accustomed to.  She played sports when she was younger, but sports were nothing compared to the amount of stress on her body during basic training.

3.  The applicant states that when she returned home from basic training she started seeing a doctor for her knee pain.  She was not assigned to a unit because she was told she had to change her military occupational specialty (MOS) from 52D (Power Generation Equipment Repairer) to another specialty.  She stayed in contact with her recruiter, but he had been reassigned to another duty station.  She underwent knee surgery in January 2008 and provided copies of her surgical documentation to a recruiter at the Northwest Arkansas Mall.

4.  The applicant attests that in November 2008 she received a letter from Mr. M____ at the 332nd Chemical Company located in Fayetteville, AR, notifying her of dates she needed to be present at the unit for drill (training).  She contends this was the first time she was made aware that she was assigned to a new unit.  She explained to Mr. M____ that she had undergone surgery earlier in the year and was having too many problems with it to drill, but he told her to bring him her records.  She had to gather her records from two doctors' offices and one hospital and she was told they could not help her until the beginning of the next calendar year since it was the holiday season.  It took a very long time.

5.  In April 2009, she went to obtain a military spouse identification card and discovered she had been discharged on 20 March 2009.  She contends she had no idea she had been discharged or any idea of the type of discharge she had received.  In November 2009, she received her Military Personnel Records Jacket in the mail.  After reviewing her record she realized she needed to get her discharge changed to show she was discharged due to the lack of things she was able to do because of her knee condition.  She contacted the 332nd Chemical Company and was told they knew very little about her situation because she was no longer in the unit.  She contends she was not informed that she received an uncharacterized discharge until December 2010 and has been trying to get it changed ever since.

6.  She attests that her knee still causes her pain and precludes her from being able to stand very long or lift very much weight which prevents her from being able to perform most jobs.  She concludes that without a good job, she is unable to pay bills and go to school.  She would like the discharge she should have received in order to improve her quality of life.

7.  The applicant provides:

* a self-authored statement
* extracts from her civilian medical records
* two letters from medical doctors
* a fact sheet on plica syndrome
* photographs of the arthroscopic surgery performed on her left knee

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 

1.  The applicant enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) for a period of 8 years on 11 September 2006.  The Reserve annex to her enlistment contract shows she acknowledged her understanding that:

	a.  Her enlistment in the USAR obligated her to a total of 8 years in the U.S. Armed Forces.

	b.  She would serve 6 years as an assigned member of a troop program unit (TPU) in the Selected Reserve (SELRES) and 2 years as an assigned member of the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR).

	c.  Her 6-year commitment to the SELRES began the day she shipped to basic training.

	d.  She was enlisting under the alternate training program which provides that:

		(1)  She must enter initial active duty for training (IADT) to undergo the common basic training.

		(2)  She would be discharged from the USAR if she failed to complete the basic training program.

		(3)  She would be released from active duty for training (ADT) upon successful completion of the basic training program and be permitted to return to a civilian status.  She would then immediately commence training with her assigned TPU in a paid drill status.

		(4)  Within 1 year of the last day of her separation from ADT (after successful completion of basic training) she would be required to again enter ADT to successfully complete advanced individual training (AIT) resulting in qualification in an MOS.

	e.  She must enter and satisfactorily complete a period of IADT to become qualified in an MOS as soon as training space became available.

	f.  Unless she was sooner removed from an active status by proper authority during the term of her statutory and contractual obligation, she must satisfactorily participate while she was assigned to a TPU of the SELRES or she must continue to participate satisfactorily as a member of the IRR if she were subsequently reassigned to the IRR.

	g.  Both periods of ADT (basic training and AIT) are considered IADT and the minimum period of time she must spend on ADT (basic training and AIT combined) was 12 weeks.

	h.  As a member of the USAR, she must participate satisfactorily during the entire period of her enlistment with the rules and regulations then in effect or which may thereafter be placed in effect by proper authority.

	i.  She must keep her commander advised of her current mailing address where she would receive official correspondence and must reply to and comply with all official orders and correspondence that she may receive.

	j.  If she failed to participate satisfactorily for any of the reasons cited above, or which may be placed into effect thereafter by proper authority, she would be declared an unsatisfactory participant and subject to order to 45 days of ADT by law and subject to separation from the SELRES or the IRR, as appropriate, either by reassignment or discharge, which may result in a pay grade reduction and an other than honorable characterization of her military service.  In addition, entitlement to educational assistance under the Montgomery GI Bill, or to bonus payments and loan repayments, which were based on service in the SELRES, may be terminated and she may be required to repay all or a portion of the funds received to the U.S. Government.

	k.  If she were voluntarily or involuntarily reassigned or transferred out of the SELRES, all entitlements under the SELRES Montgomery GI Bill or SELRES incentives would terminate.

2.  The Reserve annex to her enlistment contract also contains the following statement in all capital letters in the original for special emphasis:

I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I CANNOT COMPLETE BASIC TRAINING AND ADVANCED INDIVIDUAL TRAINING DURING ONE CONTINUOUS PERIOD BECAUSE OF A SCHOOL OR SEASONAL EMPLOYMENT CONFLICT AND THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE ALTERNATE TRAINING PROGRAM OUTLINED ABOVE HAVE BEEN FULLY READ AND EXPLAINED TO ME.  ANY QUESTIONS THAT I HAD RELATIVE TO THIS PROGRAM HAVE BEEN SATISFACTORILY ANSWERED, AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT THE ALTERNATE TRAINING PROGRAM POLICY, AS DESCRIBED ABOVE, PROVIDES FOR ME UPON ENLISTMENT.

3.  She was subsequently ordered to IADT at Fort Jackson, SC, on 6 June 2007 for the purpose of completing basic training under the Alternate Training Program (split) and she completed basic training and advanced individual training.  Her residential address shown on her orders to IADT is the same as the address that appears on her enlistment contract.  She was released from IADT on 18 August 2007.  Her orders also stipulated that she needed to arrive home no later than 20 August 2007 due to a school or seasonal employment date.  The orders further show her future MOS had been designated as 52D.

4.  A Fort Jackson Sick Slip, dated 1 August 2007, shows she sought medical attention and was issued a temporary physical profile which limited her physical activities.  The examining physician assistant also determined the applicant was cleared to have her "MRD" changed.

5.  A memorandum rendered by a U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command Liaison Noncommissioned Officer acting as a USAR initial entry training representative at Fort Jackson, dated 10 August 2007, informed the Trainee/Student Processing Center that the applicant was to be released from active duty (REFRAD) on 13 August 2007.  The reason given for this action was the fact that the applicant had a prior medical condition that was healing per her doctor and he requested that she be REFRAD because he knew high school resumed classes on 7 August and it would be best if she were allowed to return home as soon as possible to start classes.  The comment portion of this memorandum contains the following statement and indicates the applicant was not available to sign this document:

I understand I must return for completion of BASIC TRAINING and ADVANCED INDIVIDUAL TRAINING (MOS).  This training will be accomplished under the Standard Training Program.  I certify that I have read and understand the above stated information in reference to my training.  I also understand that I must report to my home unit within 72 hours of my arrival home.

6.  A memorandum rendered by the Chief, Strength Management, Headquarters, USAR Command (USARC), Fort McPherson, GA, dated 10 August 2007 informed the Commander, 90th Regional Readiness Command, North Little Rock, AR, that the Fort Jackson USAR Liaison was authorized by USARC to REFRAD the applicant due to a temporary medical condition that would not allow her to complete training prior to her "MRD" of 20 August 2007.  Her high school had resumed classes on 7 August and she needed to resume classes on 13 August.  This memorandum also served as the authority for the Little Rock Military Entrance Processing Station (MEPS) Guidance Counselor to reschedule the applicant in MOS 52D under the Standard Training Program prior to 28 June 2008.  The MEPS was tasked to ensure the applicant was medically, morally, and otherwise qualified prior to IADT.  The memorandum noted that applicant was not a basic combat training graduate.  The memorandum also stipulated that if the applicant failed to return to active duty by 28 June 2008, the unit must use notification procedures in Army Regulation 135-178 (Enlisted Administrative Separations), chapter 2, and initiate separation under chapter 8.

7.  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 completion of basic combat training.  This document shows her unit of assignment at the time as the 332nd Chemical Company.

8.  Headquarters, 90th Regional Readiness Command, Orders 08-256-00001, dated 12 September 2008, reassigned the applicant to the 362nd Psychological Operations Company, Fayetteville, AR, for duty in MOS 52D effective 12 September 2008.  Her residential address shown on this document is the same as the address that appears on her enlistment contract.

9.  The specific facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant's discharge are unavailable for review.  However, Headquarters, U.S. Army Civil Affairs and Psychological Operations Command, Fort Bragg, NC, Orders 09-079-00025, dated 20 March 2009, show she was discharged from the USAR effective 20 March 2009.  Her type of discharge is shown as "uncharacterized."  Her unit of assignment at the time is shown as the 362nd Psychological Operations Company.  Her residential address shown on this document is the same as the address that appears on her enlistment contract.

10.  A review of the Interactive Web-based System (IWS) maintained by the U.S. Army Human Resources Command shows her current address is the same as the address that appears on her enlistment contract.

11.  Her record is void of any evidence and she has not provided any evidence showing she completed any other period of active service between her release from IADT and when she was discharged from the USAR.

12.  The applicant's record is devoid of any evidence and she has not provided any evidence of any specific injury or medical condition that would have rendered her unfit for continued service.  

13.  The applicant provides extracts from her civilian medical records.

	a.  On 25 September 2007, she visited the Mercy Rogers Medical Center located in Rogers, AR, as a new patient.  One of her complaints was of left knee pain.  The examining physician noted, "She recently completed some boot camp and some heavy training and flared it up during this time.  She denies an exact moment of injury, just kind of a progressing nagging pain that she feels in the back of her knee."  The examination determined her knee had good extension and flexion.  There was no joint line pain or swelling and no patellar discomfort.  She did not have pain over the hamstring tendon when the physician stressed it and pressed on it.  The physician opined that she had hamstring tendonitis and noted the applicant was not doing any strenuous activity at the time so the applicant opted to just observe to see if it got better.

	b.  On 25 September 2007, she returned to the Mercy Rogers Medical Center primarily to address her continued left knee pain.  The examining physician noted that in addition to the pain "now she presents today complaining that she is having a popping sensation and that she is having pain around her kneecap area."  She reported there had been no recent trauma.  The physician noted the knee had good range of motion, flexion, and extension.  There was tenderness along the lateral aspect of the patellar tendon, but no joint line tenderness or instability noted.  In palpating the posterior knee, she was tender over both hamstring tendons and tender over the pes anserine area.  The physician opined that she had what appeared to be a pes anserine bursitis causing her to limp and now she had a patellar tendonitis.  As a result, he put her in a soft knee brace to wear for a week with guidance to return at that time for reassessment and to begin some physical therapy.  (According to information found on the WebMD Internet site, pes anserine bursitis is an inflammatory condition of the medial knee.  Pes anserine bursitis is primarily a self-limiting condition which responds well to an exercise/stretching program.)

	c.  On 5 December 2007, she underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of her left knee at St. Mary Hospital, Rogers, AR, which revealed she had a meniscal tear involving the anterior margin of the posterior horn of the medial meniscus.

	d.  On 10 January 2008, a physician at St. Mary's Hospital noted the applicant had attended basic training over the summer.  She did not remember a specific injury, but began experiencing knee pain after low crawling.  Most of her pain was anteromedial.  It hurt for about 3 days and then she was okay and went on to finish basic training.  But shortly after returning home she developed pain again.  She said it did swell and it felt like it popped under the kneecap.  He noted her MRI suggested the possibility of a very central posterior horn medial meniscus tear.  There was an interesting little indention in the later aspect of her medial femoral condyle, but it is very smooth and he opined that "is just the way she is made."  The physician suggested treating her condition with a steroid injection and a brief period of rehabilitation, but the applicant mentioned she was scheduled to attend AIT in the coming summer and was already supposed to be going to monthly drills.  However, the applicant elected to have surgery in order to get it taken care of as soon as possible.  The doctor reiterated his opinion that surgery should not be the first course of action and informed the applicant that if they did have to repair a miniscus tear, she would be out of action for 4 to 6 months.  The applicant still elected to have the surgery.

14.  The applicant provides a clinical note rendered by the doctor who performed her arthroscopic surgery on 21 January 2008 wherein he opined that the applicant was doing very well.  He noted she had fallen on her knee the week prior and it was sore and had caused her to miss 2 days of school.  He noted the existence of a plica and a little abraded area over the medial femoral condyle in the photographs of her surgery.  He concluded her meniscus cartilage was fine and requested that she return in a month for a follow-up.

15.  The applicant provides a fact sheet on plica syndrome extracted from the "About.com" Internet website which shows plica syndrome is a condition that is the result of a remnant of fetal tissue in the knee.  The synovial plica are membranes that separate the knee into compartments during fetal development and normally diminish in size during the second trimester of fetal development.  In adults, they exist as sleeves of tissue called "synovial folds" or plica.  In some individuals, the synovial plica is more prominent and prone to irritation.

16.  A member of a Reserve Component who is not on active duty or who is serving under a call or order to active duty for 180 days or less begins entry-level status upon enlistment in a Reserve Component.  Entry-level status of such a member of a Reserve Component terminates:  (a) 180 days after beginning training if the Soldier is ordered to ADT for one continuous period of 180 days or more; or (b) 90 days after the beginning of the second period of ADT if the Soldier is ordered to ADT under a program that splits the training into two or more separate periods of active duty.  For the purposes of characterization of service, the Soldier's status is determined by the date of notification as to the initiation of separation proceedings.

17.  Army Regulation 135-178 establishes the policies, standards, and procedures governing the administrative separation of certain enlisted Soldiers of the Army National Guard and the USAR.  Chapter 8 provides that a Soldier may be separated under this chapter while in an entry-level status when it is determined that the Soldier is unqualified for further military service by reason of unsatisfactory performance or conduct (or both) as evidenced by inability, lack of reasonable effort, failure to adapt to the military environment, or minor disciplinary infractions.  The service of a Soldier who is separated under this chapter will be uncharacterized.

18.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations) sets forth the basic authority for separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 4 provides for the separation or REFRAD upon termination of enlistment and other periods of active duty or ADT.  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 initial ADT.

19.  Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation) establishes the Army Physical Disability Evaluation System (PDES) and sets forth policies, responsibilities, and procedures that apply in determining whether a Soldier is unfit because of physical disability to reasonably perform the duties of her or her office, grade, rank, or rating.  Paragraph 3-1 contains guidance on the standards of unfitness because of physical disability.  It states, in pertinent part, that 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 Soldier reasonably may be expected to perform because of their office, grade, rank, or rating.  If a Soldier is found unfit because of physical disability, this regulation provides for disposition of the Soldier according to applicable laws and regulations.

20.  Title 10, U.S. Code, chapter 61, provides the Secretaries of the Military Departments with authority to retire or discharge a member if they find the member unfit to perform military duties because of physical disability.  The U.S. Army Physical Disability Agency, under the operational control of the Commander, U.S. Army Human Resources Command, Alexandria, VA, is responsible for operating the PDES and executes Secretary of the Army decision-making authority as directed by Congress in Title 10, U.S. Code, chapter 61, and in accordance with Department of Defense Directive 1332.18 and Army Regulation 635-40.  Soldiers enter the PDES four ways:

	a.  Referred by an MEB.  When a Soldier has received maximum benefit of medical treatment for a condition that may render the Soldier unfit for further military service, the medical treatment facility conducts an MEB to determine whether the Soldier meets the medical retention standards of Army Regulation 40-501, chapter 3.  If the Soldier does not meet medical retention standards, he or she is referred to a PEB to determine physical fitness under the policies and procedures of Army Regulation 635-40.

	b.  Referred by the MOS Medical Retention Board (MMRB).  The MMRB is an administrative screening board the chain of command uses to evaluate the ability of Soldiers with permanent 3 or 4 medical profiles to physically perform in a worldwide field environment in their primary military occupation specialty.  Referral to an MEB/PEB is one of the actions the MMRB convening authority may direct.

	c.  Referred as the Result of a Fitness for Duty Medical Examination.  When a commander believes a Soldier is unable to perform MOS-related duties due to a medical condition, the commander may refer the Soldier to the medical treatment facility for evaluation.  If evaluation results in an MEB and the MEB determines that the Soldier does not meet medical retention standards, the Soldier is referred to a PEB.

	d.  Referred as a Result of Department of the Army Headquarters Action.  The Commander, U.S. Army Human Resources Command, may refer a Soldier to the responsible medical treatment facility for medical evaluation as described above upon recommendation of The Surgeon General.  The U.S. Army Human Resources Command also directs referral to a PEB when it disapproves the MMRB recommendation to reclassify a Soldier to a different MOS.

21.  Army Regulation 635-40 provides that Soldiers enter the PDES under the presumption that they are physically fit.  This is known as the "presumption of fitness rule" which states a Soldier is presumed fit because of continued performance of military duty up to the point of separation for reasons other than physical disability.  The philosophy behind the rule is that military disability compensation is for career interruption, compensation for service-incurred conditions.  Application of the presumption of fitness rule does not mandate a finding of unfitness.  The presumption is overcome if the preponderance of evidence establishes the Soldier was physically unable to perform adequately the duties of his/her office, grade, rank, or rating because of disability.  This circumstance is aimed at long-term conditions.  It may also be overcome if acute, grave illness or injury, or other deterioration of the Soldier's physical condition occurred immediately prior to or coincident with processing for separation or retirement for reasons other than physical disability which rendered the Soldier unfit for further duty.  Future duty is a factor in this circumstance.

22.  Once an MEB determines the Soldier fails medical retention standards, the Soldier is referred to a PEB.  The PEB initially conducts an informal adjudication. 
This is a records review of the MEB and applicable personnel documents without the Soldier present.  The informal decision is forwarded to the PEB Liaison Officer for counseling of the Soldier.  If after counseling, the Soldier concurs with the findings, the case is forwarded to the U.S. Army Physical Disability Agency to accomplish disposition.  If the Soldier disagrees with the findings, he/she has the right to submit a rebuttal for reconsideration and the right to elect a formal hearing.  At the time of election for a formal hearing, the Soldier may also elect to appear and to be represented by the regularly appointed military counsel or to have counsel of her/her choice at no expense to the government.  He/she may also request essential witnesses to testify in his/her behalf.


DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention that her record should be corrected by changing the narrative reason for her uncharacterized entry-level discharge to a medical discharge with an honorable characterization of service was carefully considered.

2.  The evidence shows the applicant aggravated a preexisting medical condition while attending basic combat training.  As a result, she was issued a temporary physical profile.  However, the evidence shows the pain subsided after 3 days and she went on to complete basic combat training prior to being REFRAD in order to return to high school.  The evidence also shows her plica condition was of such a nature that it could be managed through physical therapy.  However, the applicant opted to have elective arthroscopic surgery on her knee which went well.

3.  The applicant's record is void of any evidence and she has not provided any evidence of any specific injury or medical condition that would have rendered her unfit for continued service.  Additionally, there is no indication in the applicant's records that she underwent a medical evaluation with subsequent referral to an MEB or to a PEB.

4.  In the absence of any medical evidence to the contrary, administrative regularity is presumed in the applicant's separation process.  Furthermore, the applicant failed to overcome the presumption of fitness.  The presumption is overcome if the applicant can show through a preponderance of evidence that she was physically unable to perform adequately the duties of her office, grade, rank, or rating because of a disability prior to her separation from the Army.

5.  The evidence shows the applicant was fully aware that she was to return to ADT for completion of AIT to become MOS qualified in a timely manner and that failure to comply would result in her receipt of an entry-level separation with an uncharacterized discharge.  In the interim, she was also instructed to provide documentation of her medical condition to her Reserve unit and advised that she was still responsible for participating in monthly unit drills.

6.  As a member of the USAR, she was responsible for informing her commander of any changes in her residential address; her record is void of any indication that she ever changed her address.  The applicant's chain of command mailed numerous documents to the address she provided at the time of her enlistment, yet she failed to respond.  Her record is void of any evidence and she has not provided any evidence showing participated in unit drills or that she completed any other period of active service between when she was released from initial ADT and when she was discharged from the USAR.
7.  Her record shows she initially entered ADT on 5 June 2007 and she was REFRAD on 18 August 2007 after completing 74 days of active duty service.  In view of the fact that this was a period of less than 180 days, that specific period of time resulted in her uncharacterized service.

8.  The applicant failed to comply with the parameters of her enlistment contract by not drilling with her unit and by never returning to ADT to complete AIT.  As a result, she was discharged from the USAR with uncharacterized service effective 20 March 2009.

9.  An uncharacterized discharge is not meant to be a negative reflection of a Soldier's military service.  It merely means the Soldier has not served on active duty long enough for his/her character of service to be rated.

10.  As a result, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request for an honorable discharge by reason of physical disability.

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 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)                                         AR20110021758



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110021758



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1