Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9508907C070209
Original file (9508907C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied
APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That the honorable discharge he received at the expiration of his term of service (ETS) be corrected to a separation due to medical disqualification, rated disabled.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was hospitalized while on active duty for a benign tumor on his pancreas, splenectomy, and for removal of his gallbladder.  He spent 7 weeks in the hospital for those conditions and 6 months on convalescent leave.  After his release from active duty, he enlisted in the Army National Guard (ARNG).  While in the ARNG, he applied for entry into the Warrant Officer Program, but was told he would require a waiver of a medical disqualification under chapter 2 of Army Regulation 40-501, Physical Standards for Enlistment, Appointment, and Induction, to enter on active duty for that program.  That waiver was required because of the surgery he underwent while on active duty.  In addition, the VA has now awarded him a 50 percent disability rating.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military personnel and medical records show:

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 28 May 1980 in pay grade E-3, was promoted to pay grade E-5, and was reduced to pay grade E-4.  He was awarded the military occupational specialty of medical specialist.

On 6 May 1982 the applicant was admitted to a military hospital for gallstones.  At that time the applicant reported a 10-year history of intermittent right upper quadrant abdominal pain associated with fatty food intolerance.

On 7 May 1982 the applicant underwent surgery for removal of his gallbladder and for partial pancreatic resection.  On 23 May 1982 he underwent exploratory surgery, which included drainage of his lesser sac abscess, distal pancreatectomy, splenectomy, and thoracentesis (surgical puncture of the chest wall for aspiration of fluids).  On 9 June 1982 he was placed on 30 days of convalescence leave and, on 9 July 1982, he was discharged from the hospital on a regular diet and given 2-week physical profile limitations.

The applicant completed his enlistment without further incident and was honorably released from active duty at his ETS on 27 May 1983 and transferred to an Army Reserve unit.

On 4 October 1989 the applicant was medically evaluated by a Military Entrance Processing Station (MEPS).  The MEPS physician stated that it appeared that the tumor the applicant had removed in the Army was malignant and, despite his being asymptomatic for 7 years, he was technically disqualified under chapter 2 of Army Regulation 40-501.

Army Regulation 635-40 provides that the medical treatment facility commander with the primary care responsibility will evaluate those referred to him and will, if it appears as though the member is not medically qualified to perform duty or fails to meet retention criteria, refer the member to a medical evaluation board.  Those members who do not meet medical retention standards will be referred to a physical evaluation board for a determination of the percentage of disability to be awarded.  This regulation also provided in pertinent part that when a member is being separated by reason other than physical disability, his continued performance of duty creates a presumption of fitness which can be overcome only by clear and convincing evidence that he was unable to perform his duties or that acute grave illness or injury or other deterioration of physical condition, occurring immediately prior to or coincident with separation.

Title 10, United States Code, chapter 61, provides disability retirement or separation for a member who is physically unfit to perform the duties of his office, rank, grade or rating because of disability incurred while entitled to basic pay.

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 fitness 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.  The policy under which the VA operates permits it to evaluate a veteran during the remainder of the veteran’s life time.  The amount of the rating depends upon the degree of disability on the date of evaluation.  Thus, a rating may fluctuate in either direction at any point in time and could range from a zero percent disability award to a 100 percent disability award. 

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record and applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  The applicant was never determined to be medically unfit and, therefore, was not referred to a medical evaluation board.  Absent this referral, the applicant was not eligible for separation by reason of physical unfitness.

2.  Although the applicant underwent surgery while he was on active duty, he was returned to duty following his two operations and convalescent leave.

3.  The MEPS determined that the applicant was medically disqualified under procurement standards, not retention standards.  In order to have been eligible for separation due to medical unfitness while on active duty, he would have had to have been found medically unfit to perform the duties of his office, rank, grade or rating under the retention standards of Army Regulation 40-501.

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

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070010504C080213

    Original file (20070010504C080213.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states that his medical condition was diagnosed after he had been in the Army for over 13 years. Army Regulation 635-40 governs the evaluation of physical fitness of Soldiers who may be unfit to perform their military duties because of physical disability. The evidence of record shows that the applicant was fit for duty at the time of his separation.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080018270

    Original file (20080018270.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant submitted an updated VA Rating Decision Continuation Sheet, dated 1 December 2008, and copies of his "complete" chronological record of medical care, test results, referrals, consults, reports, and various medical documentation, dated on miscellaneous dates throughout and/or after his military service, some of which were not previously reviewed by the ABCMR; therefore, they are considered new evidence and as such warrant consideration by the Board. On 9 August 1991, an MEBD...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120004639

    Original file (20120004639.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests medical retirement. The applicant provides: * Extract of Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness) * VA rating decision with allied documents, medical forms, evaluations, checklists, progress notes, and various civilian and/or service medical records throughout his military service * VA rating decision * Elected medical records, some undated and some missing continuation pages, from Advanced Pain Medicine Institute, Chevy Chase, MD * Patient Laboratory...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003086903C070212

    Original file (2003086903C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 19 August 1996, the applicant's request to be retained on active duty, until 29 December 1996 or completion of physical disability processing, whichever came first, was approved. Army Regulation 635-40 governs the evaluation for physical fitness of soldiers who may be unfit to perform their military duties because of physical disability. Considering there is no evidence to show he was unfit to perform his military duties, the Board presumes he was retained in order to under go his knee...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 04102352C070208

    Original file (04102352C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Patrick McGann | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. He was discharged from the hospital following surgery. He is now rated at 70 percent disabled because of PTSD, for a total disability rating of 100 percent.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002072374C070403

    Original file (2002072374C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant states that, because of the medical condition that was discovered while he was on active duty, he should have been referred to a medical evaluation board (MEB). Army Regulation 635-40 governs the evaluation of physical fitness of soldiers who may be unfit to perform their military duties because of physical disability. Title 10, U. S. Code, section 1201, provides for the physical disability retirement of a Regular member (or Reserve Component member on active duty over 30...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130003434

    Original file (20130003434.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The examiner stated the applicant received a consultation for general surgery for what appeared to be a mass in the right parotid gland. The "8499" indicates her condition was rated analogous to disability code "8407." Title 10, U.S. Code (USC), section 1203, provides for the physical disability separation with severance pay of a member who has less than 20 years service and a disability rated at less than 30 percent.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110004578

    Original file (20110004578.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of his military records to show that he was medically retired due to physical disability. The applicant contends that his military records should be corrected to show he was medically discharged or retired due to permanent disability with an appropriate disability rating because a test was never done to determine if his condition was related to cancer and he was diagnosed with carcinomatosis after he was medically discharged. Since there is no evidence of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130017521

    Original file (20130017521.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    This document also shows his assigned PULHES or physical profile was 311111 on the date of his separation. Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation), then in effect, established the Army Physical Disability Evaluation System (PDES) and set forth policies, responsibilities, and procedures that applied in determining whether a Soldier is unfit because of physical disability to reasonably perform the duties of his or her office, grade, rank, or...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150001518

    Original file (20150001518.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 Army rates only conditions determined to be physically unfitting at the time of discharge which disqualify the Soldier from further military service. A VA service-connected disability rating does not establish entitlement to a "medical discharge" or "medical...