IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	       27 MAY 2009

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20090003093 


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 the narrative reason for his discharge.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that the narrative reason for his discharge should be corrected to reflect “prior service injury” or “prior service injury aggravated by military service.”  He indicates that although he was injured in a bicycle accident prior to entering the Army, he passed his entrance physical and was found fit for military service.  He indicates that he exercised, trained, ran a mile in full combat gear, and completed basic training without any problems with his knee; except what would be expected from a 17-year old boy unaccustomed to vigorous military training.  The applicant also states that the continual marching and physical training at his new duty assignment following basic training caused the pain in his knee to return.  He indicates that an Army doctor informed him that he was recommending he be discharged from the Army due to a prior service injury aggravated by military service.  He states that he has not had any trouble with his knee since his discharge from the Army and that he is only asking for what deserves.

3.  The applicant provides a self-authored statement and Standard Form (SF) 180 (Request Pertaining to Military Records) 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 military record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army and entered active duty on 1 March 1966.  He completed basic combat training at Fort Benning Georgia, and was reassigned to Fort Gordon, Georgia to attend advanced individual training (AIT) on 21 May 1966.

3.  The applicant's Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) contains a medical narrative summary (NARSUM), dated 14 June 1966, which indicates the applicant's chief complaint at that time was “catching in left knee.”  It also includes a history of his illness that indicates he first injured his knee in October 1965, in a motor scooter accident in which his entire left leg was crushed.  The applicant was finally diagnosed with derangement of knee, internal, probable meniscus tear, not in the line of duty, existed prior to military service.  It was determined that the applicant failed to meet induction or enlistment standards and a recommendation was made that he be separated from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-205 (Personnel Separations – Discharge and Release – For the Convenience of the Government).

4.  On 14 June 1966, the applicant signed a FGAG 200-2R (Statement) indicating he had been informed that his medical condition met retention fitness standards but did not meet medical fitness standards at the time of his enlistment or induction and that as a result he could apply for separation by reason of erroneous enlistment or induction in accordance with paragraph 3a (6), 
Army Regulation 635-205.  The applicant applied for separation accordingly.

5.  The applicant’s OMPF is void of a complete medical board packet.  It does contain a 1st Endorsement, Subject:  Medical Board Proceedings, which indicates the applicant's discharge was approved and that identified the authority and reason for his discharge as paragraph 3-6a, Army Regulation 635-205, Separation Program Number (SPN) 375 (discharge because of not meeting medical fitness standards at time of enlistment (or induction)).

7.  On 1 July 1966, the applicant was honorably discharged after completing
4 months and 1 day of active military service.  The DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) issued to him at that time confirms, in Item 11c (Reason and Authority), that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-205, paragraph 3a(6), by reason of not meeting medical fitness standards at the time of his enlistment.  The applicant authenticated this document with his signature in Item 34 (Signature of Person Being Transferred or Discharged) on the date of his discharge.

8.  Army Regulation 635-205, change 4, dated 21 July 1961, paragraph 3a(6) provided for the separation of an individual who claimed that he was erroneously enlisted or inducted because he did not meet the medical fitness standards at the time of his enlistment or induction.  A request for discharge under this provision would be submitted by the individual to his unit commander not later than
4 months subsequent to enlistment or induction.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s contention that his narrative reason for discharge should be changed to reflect “prior service injury” or “prior service injury aggravated by military service” has been carefully considered.  However, there is insufficient evidence to support this claim.

2.  The evidence of record shows the applicant requested discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-205, paragraph 3a(6), by reason of erroneous enlistment because he did not meet the medical fitness standards at the time of his enlistment, as evidenced in the FGAG 200-2R on file.  Therefore, absent evidence to the contrary, it appears the applicant's voluntary request for discharge was processed in accordance with the applicable regulation in effect at the time and that he was properly and equitably discharged accordingly.  Therefore, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support granting the requested relief. 

3.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.


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.



      _________XXX______________
               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)                                         AR20090003093



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090003093



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1