APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his records be corrected to show that his separation was based on a physical disability. APPLICANT STATES: That he was granted a disability rating of 30 percent by the VA upon his separation from active duty. EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military and medical records show: On 25 July 1967, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army. He completed his required training and was awarded military occupational specialty 36K (Field Wireman). He was advanced to pay grade E-3 effective 28 December 1967. During the period 19 December 1967-12 April 1968, the applicant is credited with service in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN). In March or April 1968, VA records show that the applicant went to Hawaii for Rest and Recuperation. After being there for only one day, he proceeded to Long Island, New York, where he developed an anxiety reaction and depression. At some unspecified time, he became a patient at Valley Forge General Hospital, Phoenixville, Pennsylvania. On 12 June 1968, a physical examination cleared the applicant for separation and noted that he had an emotionally unstable personality which had existed prior to service. During the period 30 June-1 July 1968, the applicant was absent without leave, however, there is no indication of disciplinary action taken. On 16 July 1968, the unit commander informed the applicant that he had initiated action to separate him under Army Regulation 635-212, for unsuitability, based on his emotionally unstable personality and of his rights. The applicant, with legal counsel, acknowledged the notification; waived consideration of and personal appearance before a board of officers; elected not to make statements in his own behalf; and waived legal representation. On 23 July 1968, the appropriate separation official approved his separation and directed he be issued an Honorable Discharge Certificate. On 6 August 1968, he was separated, in pay grade E-3, under the above cited regulation. His Report of Separation indicates that he had 1 year and 12 days of creditable service and 2 days of lost time. He was entitled to award of the National Defense Service Medal and the Vietnam Service Medal. On 16 January 1997, a VA Rating Decision indicated that the applicant had been granted a service-connected disability rating of 100 percent, effective 4 January 1997, for post traumatic stress disorder. Previously, he had been rated at 30 percent, effective 7 August 1968. This same decision denied service-connection for Hepatitis C, Hemorrhoids, substance abuse (willful misconduct), and Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV). Army Regulation 635-212, then in effect, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel from active duty. That regulation provided, in pertinent part, that commanders would separate a member when, in the commander’s judgment, it was clearly established that the member would not develop sufficiently to become a satisfactory soldier. When separation for unsuitability was warranted, an honorable or general discharge, as directed by the convening authority, could be issued. Title 38, United States Code, sections 310 and 331, permits the VA to award compensation for a medical condition which was incurred in or aggravated by active military service. The VA, however, is not required by law to determine medical unfitness for further military service. The VA, in accordance with its own policies and regulations, awards compensation solely on the basis that a medical condition exists and that said medical condition reduces or impairs the social or industrial adaptability of the individual concerned. Consequently, due to the two concepts involved, an individual’s medical condition, although not considered medically unfitting for military service at the time of processing for separation, discharge or retirement, may be sufficient to qualify the individual for VA benefits based on an evaluation by that agency. DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded: 1. 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 the aforementioned requirement. 2. The evidence in this case does not support his contention that there was an error or injustice in his separation from active duty. 3. The rating by the VA does not necessarily demonstrate any error or injustice by the Army, since the applicant met medical retention standards at the time of separation. 4. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant’s request. DETERMINATION: The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice. BOARD VOTE: GRANT GRANT FORMAL HEARING DENY APPLICATION Karl F. Schneider Acting Director