IN THE CASE OF:  

		BOARD DATE: 12 March 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140012002 


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 correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show he was discharged due to "Disability", instead of "Condition, Not a Disability."

2.  The applicant states that he wants to go back to school using the Post 9/11 GI Bill.  He was told that he is not eligible for 100% of the GI Bill because his 
DD Form 214 does not show he was discharged due to disability.  He is still dealing with the medical issues he had while on active duty.  After seven years they have not gone away.

3.  The applicant provides copies of his:

* DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of the United States), dated 29 June 2012
* Service medical care documents that show he was seen for medical conditions from August 2006 to November 2006
* Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Radiology Reports, printed on 
13 January 2014

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 enlisted in the Regular Army on 8 June 2006.  He did not complete training and was not awarded a military occupational specialty. 
 
3.  A Moncrief Army Community Hospital, Fort Jackson, South Carolina,  Memorandum for Record, dated 9 November 2006, signed by the Chief, Physical Therapy (a major) states:

	a.  "[The applicant] was initially evaluated in late July 2006.  His complaint was bilateral hip and knee pain with running.  He was sent to PTRP 8 Aug 2006. His diagnosis was stress fracture in the hips and knees which has subsequently healed."

	b.  "He has been on extended profiles and unit con leave.  He participates in his rehabilitation as directed and remains motivated.  He is still unable to tolerate running for even a few minutes due to soft tissue pain in his legs.  He has had 
14 weeks of therapy.  The average recovery for this type of problem is 12 weeks. Due to his lack of physical preparation prior to enlistment and his slow healing so far, I expect his recovery period to be prolonged.  There is no need for continued rehabilitation.  He has reached the maximum benefit from Physical Therapy.  He is not a candidate for Medical Board."

	c.  "[The applicant's] ability to successfully complete rehab within an acceptable time frame is minimal and his medical condition will hinder successful completion of the PTRP program and/or safe completion of IET without additional injury.  All he needs is sufficient time without running to allow complete healing."

	d.  "Recommend the chain of command consider him for discharge 
AR 635-200, Chapter 5-17." 

4.  His immediate commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate action to separate him under Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), Chapter 5, paragraph 5-17, by reason of other designated physical or mental condition.  The immediate commander stated the applicant had been treated extensively for soft tissue pain.  The prognosis and recovery time would unreasonably interfere with the applicant's ability to successfully ship and complete training.  The commander recommended the applicant receive an honorable discharge.

5.  The applicant acknowledged receipt of the separation notification memorandum, waived his right to consult with counsel, and indicated he would not submit a statement in his own behalf.

6.  Subsequent to this acknowledgement, the applicant's immediate commander recommended separation. 

7.  On 6 December 2006, consistent with the chain of command's recommendations, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge and directed his service be characterized as honorable.

8.  His DD Form 214 shows he was discharged on 13 December 2006, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-17, by reason of "condition, not a disability."  His character of service is shown as "Honorable."  He had completed 6 months and 6 days of creditable active military service.

9.  He provides copies of:

	a.  Service medical care documents that show he was seen from August 2006 to November 2006 for several complaints including joint, knee, hip pain and stress fractures from running.

	b.  VA Radiology Reports, printed on 13 January 2014.  The findings show, in part, "The whole body images demonstrate increased tracer uptake in the left side of skull.  This finding is of unknown etiology, likely benign osteoid osteoma (benign bone tumor).  There is also increased tracer uptake in the right 2nd or 3rd metatarsal bone seen mostly dorsal view and increased tracer uptake in the first right metatarsophalangeal joint and right talonavicular joint."

10.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-17, states commanders who are special court-martial convening authorities may approve separation under this paragraph on the basis of other physical or mental conditions not amounting to disability that potentially interfere with assignment to or performance of duty.  A recommendation for separation must be supported by documentation confirming the existence of the physical or mental condition.  Members may be separated for physical or mental conditions not amounting to disability which are sufficiently severe that the Soldier's ability to effectively perform military duties is significantly impaired.


DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's records confirm he was separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-17, by reason of a physical condition, not a disability.  He was diagnosed with a condition that prevented him from completing training.  He was advised of and waived his rights. 

2.  The ABCMR does not upgrade discharges based solely on the passage of time nor does it correct records solely for the purpose of establishing eligibility for benefits from another agency.  Granting of veterans' benefits is not within the purview of the ABCMR.

3.  In view of the above, his request should be denied.

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)                                         AR20130006320



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140012002



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1