IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  30 April 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140015517 


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 records to show he was medically discharged (or referred to a medical evaluation board (MEB)) instead of honorably discharged by reason of failing to qualify for promotion to chief warrant officer two (CW2). 

2.  The applicant states

	a.  He is requesting his discharge be changed to a medical retirement due to the fact that he did not meet the retention standards because of an injury that occurred while on active duty for the U.S. Army.  On 22 June 2009, he was the sole survivor of a helicopter accident that occurred during active duty training at Fort Rucker, AL.  Several injuries were sustained as a result of the accident.  He sustained several broken/fractured vertebrae, which required a fusion of his lower back (L1-L4).  As a result, he has constant and severe pain in his back and radiculopathy (numbness) in his right leg and foot.  There were also two fractures to the vertebra in his neck that were left to heal on their own, and a traumatic brain injury causing vertigo, headaches, and sleep issues.  He was in the hospital for 7 days and he was in a back brace and neck brace for the next 4 months.  In October 2009, he was reassigned to the Warrior Transition Unit (WTU) at Fort Leonard Wood, MO.  This is where he was told he would be evaluated and the WTU would build his treatment plan.

	b.  Once his treatment was finalized, he was to be sent to a Community Based WTU (CBWTU) near his home of record to complete his recovery.  During his initial physical at Fort Leonard Wood the physician assigned to his case told him that he was not "broken enough" to stay at the WTU and signed the order to return him to duty.  He informed his unit at Fort Rucker of the doctor's findings and was told by Fort Rucker that he was not to return for training.  In December 2009, he was released from active duty and returned to his civilian job.  When he was sent home, they did not provide him with a plan for any needed medical assistance or physical therapy.  After seeking help, he was told by the WTU at Fort Leonard Wood that his reserve unit was responsible for his medical care and physical therapy.  At this time, he was attached to Headquarters and Headquarters Company (HHC), 52nd Aviation Regiment, Los Alamitos, CA, but he was at his home in MN.  The 52nd Aviation Regiment was of no help and ignored his many requests for assistance in obtaining follow-up care for his injuries and physical therapy.   

	c.  He was finally assisted by a commander of one of the local units in MN and he was able to get the much-needed physical therapy.  In June 2010, he was sent to Fort Riley, KS to retake the Class 1A flight physical for his return to Fort Rucker to continue flight training.  The Flight Surgeon at Fort Riley completed the exam and the file was sent to Fort Rucker for review and final approval.  After several months, the Aviation Review Board at Fort Rucker returned his file marked "Suspension Continued."  At this time, he was told to look at other options.  He attempted to contact the 52nd Aviation Regiment on many occasions to inquire about reclassifying to a different warrant officer military occupational specialty (MOS).  The personnel at the 52nd Aviation Regiment could not give him any assistance in reclassifying or in any personnel issues at all.  He was told that they would not pay for any training that he may need, and told him he was required to fly to CA to attend battle assemblies with them and would not be allowed to do it locally (MN).  

	d.  In June 2010, he was finally transferred to the 644th Area Support Group (ASG), Fort Snelling, MN, where they were willing to assist him with the reclassification process.  In August 2011, he was notified by his commander that he was required to take an Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) and his profile had been lifted.  He contacted warrant officer recruiters with the hope that they could point him in the right direction, and was told that they did not know how the reclassification process worked for a warrant officer.  Since he held a feeder MOS for MOS 255A (Information Systems Technician), he contacted the Signal Warrant Officer (WO) Personnel Developer (Proponent), and after many inquiries and many months, he was told that he did not meet the prerequisites for the Signal WO MOS.  

	e.  In November 2011, he contacted the proponent point of contact for the Mobility (882A) WO Branch (he also held a feeder MOS), and he was also told that he did not meet the prerequisites.  On 24 January 2012, he was informed by his unit that they had received his [U.S. Army Reserve] discharge orders effective 1 March 2012.  At that time he explored all of his options.  He was told by recruiters and the WO branch chief that he was a warrant officer and could not go back to enlisted status.  He spoke with recruiters about the possibility of reenlisting into the reserves and was told that he would not pass the Military Entrance Processing Station physical with his back injuries.  Following the advice of his civilian physician, he started the process for a permanent medical profile.  His profile was granted on 21 February 2012, which should have initiated the MEB process.  Due to the backlog in the medical profile system, his paperwork was never processed.  

	f.  On 1 March 2012, he was discharged from the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR).  He attempted through his Congressman to get his discharge revoked, but his attempts were not successful.  In August 2012, he attempted to enlist in the MN Army National Guard (ARNG) and took the entrance physical at Camp Ripley, MN.  The physician that reviewed his case informed him that a back fusion was a disqualifying factor, and he was not allowed to enlist in the ARNG (Army Regulation (AR) 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness), paragraph 2-29)).  According to AR 40-501, he should have been offered or considered for medical retirement at several stages in this drawn out process.  Paragraph 4-25 states he should have been medically evaluated while on active duty based on the severity of the accident and the nature of his injuries.  Next, paragraph 7-4b states he should have been given an MEB after a year of being on a temporary profile, and he was on temporary profiles for over two years. Paragraph 3-3 states when the Army identified that he could not be retained due to his medical condition he should have been evaluated by an MEB.  Lastly, he should have been given an MEB after being put on a profile by his doctor.

	g.  According to AR 40-501, paragraph 3-3, he should not have been discharged while undergoing an MEB, and his profile had been approved.  He feels that he should have been offered a medical retirement due to the severe nature of his injuries that occurred as a direct result of an accident that happened while on active duty.  He also feels that once it became apparent that he could not complete his flight training and that he was not qualified for another warrant officer MOS he should have been given an MEB and medically retired.  Furthermore, since he cannot be retained as a WO and he cannot meet the standards to reenlist into the Army he feels that a medical retirement is in order.  He also believes that the reason for his discharge is not warranted.  

	h.  His discharge orders state that he was discharged due to failure to get promoted.  As the Board sees, there was no way possible for him to take the necessary steps to be promoted in the time he was given after the accident.  With all of the time he needed for recovery from the accident and to find a new MOS, he never had a chance to meet the promotion time requirement.  If the reason he was discharged was really due to the fact that he didn't meet the promotion timeline, he should have been discharged in October 2010.  But his discharge wasn't until March 2012.  This leads him to believe that he was not discharged in October 2010 because he was on a temporary profile and the Army didn't want to conduct an MEB.  Once they found a doctor who was willing to lift his profile, they started the discharge process.  When he requested an MEB, even after daily phone calls from his commander asking for an urgent response, they never got to his paperwork before his discharge date. After faithfully serving our country for 17 years, and one deployment to a combat zone, it is only right for him to receive the MEB or the medical retirement he deserves.

3.  The applicant provides:

* Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical records
* service medical records related to his back injury in flight school
* multiple DA Forms 3349 (Physical Profile)
* multiple personnel orders
* multiple character reference letters
* civilian medical provider statements and medical records

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant's records show he was born in October 1977. 

2.  He enlisted in the USAR on 20 June 1995 and he held MOS 88N (Traffic Management Coordinator).  He appears to have served through multiple extensions or reenlistments in a variety of assignments. 

3.  He entered active duty on multiple occasions including October 2004 to November 2005, during which period he served in Iraq from 24 November 2004 to 27 October 2005.

4.  He entered active duty on 24 September 2008 and he completed WO Candidate School.  He was honorably discharged from active duty on 28 October 2008 to accept an appointment or a commission. 

5.  He was appointed as a Reserve WO of the Army and executed an oath of office on 29 October 2008.  He appears to have been ordered to active duty on 30 October 2008.  His active duty orders are not available for review.  He also appears to have been assigned to B Company, 1st Battalion, 145th Aviation Regiment, Fort Rucker, AL, for training. 

6.  On 22 June 2009, he was involved in a helicopter crash during training.  He provides a DA Form 2173 (Statement of Medical Examination and Duty Status), dated 29 September 2009, that shows he sustained spinal injury (fracture, closed C1-C4 with anterior synd; burst fracture L3) and he was evacuated to Southeast Alabama Medical Center.  His injury was determined to be in the line of duty on 13 October 2009.  

7.  He underwent treatment and/or recovery using a recommended medical treatment plan for the fractures to heal completely.  A statement, dated 
28 September 2009, from his WTU physician indicated the intent of the management plan was to gradually rehabilitate him and return him to duty.  

8.  On 21 July 2009, the Director, U.S. Army Aeromedical Activity, Fort Rucker, recommended the applicant's medical disqualification from further flying service.  He indicated that the applicant did not meet medical fitness standards of Class 1W flying duties due to his history of spinal fractures.  His condition was not compatible with the operational requirements of Army aviation.  The recommendation was later approved by HRC and HRC terminated his aviation service. 

9.  On 29 September 2009, he requested active duty medical extension (ADME). He was counseled by his commander and he indicated his desire to continue on active duty.  He was also issued a DA Form 3349, temporary, that shows the medical condition of cervical neck fracture, lumbar spine fracture with spinal fusion surgery.  The profiled assigned the functional limitations of "physical activity only at the recommendation of treating neuro-spine specialist or physical therapist."

10.  On 22 October 2009, HRC published Orders A-10-928830 ordering him to active duty with assignment to the WTU, Fort Leonard Wood, MO, for 179 days, effective 14 October 2009. 

11.  On 4 November 2009, he was issued a temporary profile (through 4 February 2010) for the lumbar fracture injury.  The profile assigned the functional limitations of "no jumping, running, marching" and "may do push-ups at own tolerance." 

12.  Upon arrival at the WTU, Fort Leonard Wood, he was assigned a Comprehensive Transition and Care Plan that shows: 

* training injury requiring rehabilitation plan: assist him to transition to rehab status and set long term goals
* multiple spinal fractures with fusion L1-L4 and repair of tear: rehab after healing process complete, expect 180 days to rehab
* pain post operation: pain controlled with medications
* ADME orders: coordinate with CBWTU
* prognosis: good to meet goals, will complete medical evaluation and achieve pain control; transfer to CBWTU

13.  Also on 4 November 2009, the applicant's physician at the WTU indicated that a medical evaluation of the applicant resulted in a finding of fit for duty, and he was to be released from active duty to rejoin his unit in its mission.  He met medical retention standards per AR 40-501 and AR 40-500 (Patient Administration).  The evaluation found he may need to perform MOS duties within the limits of his physical profile. 

14.  He was honorably released from active duty on 28 December 2009 in accordance with paragraph 2-7 of AR 600-8-24 (Officer Transfer or Discharge) by reason of completion of his required active service.  He was transferred back to his USAR unit, the 6th Battalion, 52nd Aviation Regiment. 

15.  In 2010 and 2011 he attended battle assemblies with the 457th Transportation Battalion, Fort Snelling, MN.  He also submitted a DA Form 1380 (Record of Individual Performance of Reserve Duty Training) to update his retirement points. 

16.  On 16 October 2010, he underwent a medical examination at Fort Riley, KS. 

	a.  The DD Form 2808 (Report of Medical Examination) shows the reason for the exam was "Class I Initial Flight Physician Exam."  The examining physician assigned him a PULHES of "1-1-1-1-1-1."  He noted the applicant's spinal injury and fusion of L1-L4.  Additionally, item 74 does not indicate if he was found qualified or not qualified for service.  

	b.  The Aeromedical Summary Examination – Flying Duty Health Screen Summary is stamped with the entry "Disqualified" and "Suspension Continued." 

17.  On 4 May 2011, Headquarters, 63rd Regional Support Command, Mountain View, CA, published Orders 11-124-00029 reassigning him from the 6th Battalion, 52nd Aviation Regiment, to another troop program unit of the USAR, the 644th Combat Support Group, Fort Snelling, MN. 

18.  On 9 June 2011, he was issued a permanent profile by a medical doctor.  The approving authority's block contains the entry "approval not required."  The profile was issued for the "Medical Condition" of "Previous PULHES modified for back injury; no longer a profiled condition per profiling guidance from USAR Command."  The "Functional Limitations" block of this profile contains the same entry as the "Medical Condition" block. 

19.  On 4 and 6 September 2011 respectively, the applicant submitted two DA Forms 4187 (Personnel Action) wherein he requested reclassification into MOS 882A (Mobility Officer) or 255A (Information System Technician). 

20.  On 14 September 2011, the WO Proponent Office of the Chief of Transportation recommended disapproval of reclassification into 882A because the applicant did not possess any of the basic skills and prerequisites for this MOS. 

21.  On 24 January 2012, Headquarters, USAR Command, Fort Bragg, NC, published Orders 12-024-00044 honorably discharging him from the USAR effective 1 March 2012 by reason of failing to qualify for promotion to CW2, in accordance with AR 135-175 (Separation of Officers), paragraph 4-5a. 

22.  On 14 February 2012, a civilian medical doctor wrote that the applicant's current symptoms were consistent with low back pain.  He should be excused from physical activities that could aggravate his back pain, including running, sit-ups, or lifting over 20 pounds.  In light of his previous injury, the doctor recommended his duties be primarily office-type activity. 

23.  On 21 February 2012, he was issued a permanent profile signed by a medical doctor and approved by a military medical doctor.  The "Medical Condition" is listed as chronic back pain due to back injury and the functional limitations are listed as "chronic back pain L-3 (paragraph 3-39) with RLE radiculopathy following injury and surgery in 2006.  Providers' note dated 20120214 recommends modified Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) with no run and sit-ups, as well as some other Soldier skill limitations." 

24.  On 1 March 2012, he was discharged from the USAR.

25.  In March 2012, he initiated a Congressional inquiry.  In a letter addressed to his Member of Congress, the USARC Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1, stated: 

	a.  The applicant was involved in an aviation accident during the Warrant Officer Basic Course.  He was given a permanent profile (P-3) and returned to his unit of assignment on 28 December 2009.  He was reassigned on 4 May 2011 and found fit for duty.  He was afforded the opportunity to be medically boarded at that time but he did not pursue this option. 

	b.  He was discharged from the USAR for failing to be promoted within 2 years of appointment in accordance with AR 135-175.  He was appointed as a warrant officer on 29 October 2008. In January 2012, the USAR Command became aware that he exceeded the time in grade requirements for promotion as of October 2010 and should have been discharged.  He was discharged in March 2012 but his orders were published on 24 January 2012, thus giving him the latitude to either give up his appointment through his enlistment or clear his unit of assignment.  Additionally, based on his approved line of duty, he has the option to go to the VA for ongoing medical care. 

26.  In the processing of this case an advisory opinion was received from Brooke Army Medical Center on 5 February 2015.  The advisory official (MEB physician) stated: 

	a.  A review of the applicant's records show he was injured during a helicopter crash on 22 June 2009, resulting in a L1-L4 lumbar fusion with fixation rods.  A line of duty was approved on 13 October 2009.  A temporary L-4 profile was provided by Fort Rucker on 9 September 2009 and a temporary L-3 profile was provided on 2 November 2009 at the intake appointment for the WTU, Fort Leonard Wood.  Despite the documented profile limitations, it was noted in the clinical notes that the applicant did not meet the medical requirements for WTU admission and subsequent notes state that "Return to Duty memorandum" was issued.  At release from active duty and return to his home in MN on 
28 December 2009, the applicant still required physical therapy and vicodin for his back pain. 

	b.  On 17 August 2010, he completed another Class I Initial Flight Physical but he was disqualified as a result of his back condition and his previous suspension was continued at the Army Aeromedical Center.  At that time, the DD Form 2808 (Report of Medical Examination) showed no profile limitations in box 74b.  A permanent profile was later written on 9 June 2011 showing no limitations and noting that the back injury was no longer a profiled condition per profiling guidance from the USAR Command.  A request signed on 6 September 2011 for reclassification from 001A to 882A was denied on 14 September 2011.

	c.  Orders for his honorable discharge on 1 March 2012 by reason of failing to obtain promotion were published on 24 January 2012.  A permanent L-3 profile with a second approval signature from LTC An---- R----- was signed on 22 February 2012 and indicated the need for an MEB in box 7.  The profile limitations were supported by the civilian provider memorandum, dated 14 February 2012, recommending no running, no sit-ups, or lifting over 20 pounds. 

	d.  Based on the above history, the applicant should have received an MEB for his back before his discharge if the 22 February 2012 profile was accurate.  This assumes that the interim 9 June 2011 profile was likely not accurate and that the applicant never improved sufficiently enough to meet medical retention standards after the accident.  This is suggested by the complete lack of any limitations on the 9 June 2011 profile such as limiting running or avoiding sit-ups, as would be expected for a four-level lumbar fusion and an injury of that severity. Additionally, the statement that the profile was provided based on the USAR command guidance suggests that it may not have been based on current physical limitations.  The applicant was also hoping he could be reinstated to helicopter pilot training at the time and his limitations must have been minimized. He was not fit for duty when he was released from the WTU on 28 December 2009 had he still had an L-3 profile.  Since that was less than one year from his injury, an MEB would not have been required at the time as the medical retention determination point had not been achieved. 

	e.  The applicant received a VA compensation and pension examination in September 2012 that showed a moderate residual right sensory radiculopathy with a functional impact on his ability to work.  He received a 30 percent rating for his back and radiculopathy.  There was no evidence of a functional impact from psychological limitations or a traumatic brain injury.   

27.  The applicant was provided with a copy of this advisory opinion to allow him an opportunity to submit a rebuttal or additional comments.  He did not respond. 

28.  AR 600-8-24 prescribes the officer transfers from active duty to the Reserve component (RC) and discharge functions for all officers on active duty for 30 days or more.  Paragraph 2-7 provides for processing voluntary release from active duty due to expiration of active duty commitment. 

29.  AR 135-175 prescribes the policies, criteria, and procedures governing the separation of Reserve officers of the Army.  Paragraph 4-5a (Removal from an active status) states that members of the Army Reserve will be removed from an active status for any of the reasons in paragraphs (1) through (18), with or without the officer’s consent regardless of the length of commissioned service. Removal will be by discharge, transfer to the Retired Reserve (if eligible and requested by the member) or, if eligible, transfer to control group (inactive).  Reason 4 is for failure to qualify for promotion when a WO1, who has completed his statutory military service obligation, fails to qualify for promotion to WO2 (AR 135–155, Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant Officers Other Than General Officers). 

30.  AR 135-155 prescribes policy and procedures used for selecting and promoting commissioned officers (other than commissioned WO) of the ARNG and of commissioned and WO of the USAR.  Table 2-3 states for promotion from WO to CW2, the maximum years in the lower grade is 2 years.  A WO1 may be selected for promotion; however, the WO basic course must be completed before promotion unless pre-certified by the WO MOS proponent and a WO MOS is awarded (for example, former officers and WOs).   

31.  AR 40-501 governs medical fitness standards for enlistment, induction, and appointment as well as medical fitness standards for retention and separation. 

	a.  Chapter 2 provides physical standards for enlistment, appointment, and induction.  The disqualifying medical conditions are listed in paragraphs 2–3 through 2–32.  Unless otherwise stipulated, the conditions listed in paragraphs 2–3 through 2–32 are those that would be disqualifying by virtue of current diagnosis or for which the candidate has a verified past medical history.  Paragraph 2-29 covers the spine and sacroiliac joints. 

	b.  Chapter 3 gives the various medical conditions and physical defects which may render a Soldier unfit for further military service and which fall below the standards required for the individuals in paragraph 3–2.  These medical conditions and physical defects, individually or in combination, are those that (in pertinent part) significantly limit or interfere with the Soldier’s performance of their duties.  Paragraph 3-3 (Disposition) states Soldiers with conditions listed in this chapter who do not meet the required medical standards will be evaluated by an MEB as defined in AR 40–400 and will be referred to a PEB as defined in AR 635–40 with the following caveats: USAR or ARNG/ARNG Soldiers not on active duty, whose medical condition was not incurred or aggravated during an active duty period, will be processed in accordance with chapter 9 and chapter 10 of this regulation.  

	c.  Chapter 4 provides the medical fitness standards for flying duties.  Paragraph 4-25 (Spine, scapula, ribs, and sacroiliac joints) states the causes of medical unfitness for flying duty Classes 1/2/2F/3/4 are the causes listed in paragraphs 2–11 and 2–29 plus the following: (1) History of chronic or recurrent disabling episodes of back pain, especially when associated with significant objective findings; and (2) History of any fracture or dislocation of the vertebrae, to include insertion of spinal orthopedic hardware.  A compression fracture involving less than 25 percent of a single vertebra is not disqualifying if the injury occurred more than 12 months ago and is asymptomatic; except any degree of compression fracture of the cervical vertebrae, twelfth thoracic vertebrae, or first lumbar vertebra.  A history of fracture of the transverse or spinous process is not disqualifying if asymptomatic. 
	d.  Chapter 7 (Physical Profile) prescribes a system for classifying individuals according to functional abilities.  Paragraph 7-4b states a profile is considered permanent unless a modifier of "T" (temporary) is added.  A permanent profile may only be awarded or changed by the appropriate authority.  All permanent "3" and "4" profiles, for Soldiers on active duty, will be reviewed by an MEB physician or physician approval authority.  An MEB physician is a military treatment facility (MTF) dedicated subject matter expert trained to perform disability evaluations per guidelines established in DODI 1332.38 (Department of Defense Instruction – Disability Evaluation System (DES)) (AR 40–400 for MEB process).  The MEB physician will assist the MTF commander in educating profiling officers on current physical profiling regulations and policy guidance.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant was involved in a helicopter crash during active duty training.  He sustained a spinal injury and he was evacuated to Southeast Alabama Medical Center.  His injury was determined to be in line of duty on 13 October 2009.  He underwent treatment and/or recovery using a recommended plan for his fractures to heal completely.  

2.  Following treatment, therapy, and recovery, his WTU physician indicated that a medical evaluation of the applicant resulted in a finding of fit for duty.  He was released from active duty to rejoin his unit in its mission.   

3.  He was honorably released from active duty on 28 December 2009 in accordance with paragraph 2-7 of AR 600-8-24 by reason of completion of his required active service.  He was transferred back to his USAR unit.

4.  While in the USAR, he participated in battle assemblies and earned retirement points though it is unclear what duties he performed or in what MOS he performed those duties.  However, because he was not promoted to CW2 within 2 years of his appointment, his separation was required.  In January 2012, USARC became aware that he exceeded the time in grade requirements for promotion as of October 2010 and should have been discharged.  He was discharged in March 2012 but his orders were published on 24 January 2012, thus giving him the latitude to either give up his appointment through an enlistment or clear his unit of assignment.  

5.  A thorough review by an MEB physician at Brooke Army Medical Center determined the following: 

	a. The applicant was issued a permanent L-3 profile with a second approval signature from LTC An---- R----- on 22 February 2012 indicated the need for an MEB in box 7.  The profile limitations were supported by the civilian provider memorandum, dated 14 February 2012, recommending no running, no sit-ups, or lifting over 20 pounds. 

	b.  Based on the provided history, the applicant should have received an MEB for his back before his discharge if the 22 February 2012 profile was accurate (emphasis added).  This assumes that the interim profile, dated 9 June 2011 was likely not accurate and that the applicant never improved sufficiently enough to meet medical retention standards after the accident.  This is suggested by the complete lack of any limitations on the 9 June 2011 profile such as limiting running or avoiding sit-ups, as would be expected for a four-level lumbar fusion and an injury of that severity.   

	c.  The statement that the profile was provided based on the USARC guidance suggests that it may not have been based on current physical limitations.  The applicant was also hoping he could be reinstated in a helicopter pilot training at the time and his limitations must have been minimized.  He was not fit for duty when he was released from the WTU on 28 December 2009 had he still had an L-3 profile.  Since that was less than one year from his injury, an MEB would not have been required at the time as the medical retention determination point had not been achieved. 

6.  In view of the foregoing evidence, there is insufficient evidence to show the applicant should have been retired for his low back pain; however, he should have been at least allowed to be considered by an MEB to make a determination if his case should or should not be referred to a PEB for a determination of fitness and possible rating.  

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

____X____  ____X____  ____X____  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by:
* having the Office of The Surgeon General contact the applicant and arrange a physical evaluation via appropriate medical facilities and, if appropriate, referral to an MEB for a determination of retention standards for his back pain
* directing the Office of The Surgeon General to issue appropriate invitational travel orders to the applicant to accomplish the physical evaluation and, if appropriate, the MEB
* directing the Office of The Surgeon General to issue appropriate invitational travel orders to the applicant to prepare for and participate in consideration of his case by a PEB in the event that a PEB is necessary
* in the event a PEB finds that the individual concerned has a medically unfitting condition and it is compensable, action will be take to correct his records to show he was appropriately separated effective 1 March 2012

2.  The Board further determined the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to medical retirement at this time.




      _______ _   _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)                                         AR20140015517



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140015517



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1