APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his record be corrected to show that he was discharged for a physical disability.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he was released for a medical condition which did not exist at the time of his induction.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military and medical records show:
On 8 December 1967, the applicants physical examination for induction was annotated that he had a history of asthma, since childhood with infrequent episodes and that he was found qualified for induction.
On 8 December 1967, the applicant was inducted into the Army of the United States. He completed his required training and was awarded military occupational specialty 11B (Light Weapons Infantryman). He was advanced to pay grade E-3.
During the period 11 June-25 July 1968, when he returned to the Continental United States on emergency leave, he was assigned to a unit in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN).
On 12 September 1968, while apparently in the process of returning to the RVN, he complained of and was treated for asthma. Subsequently, on 26 September 1968, medical authorities recommended his separation, indicating that he was not deployable.
On 26 September 1968, the applicant requested Release by Virtue of Void Induction, under Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-9.1, because he did not meet medical fitness standards for induction on 8 December 1967. In that request, he indicated I understand that my release from the Army will be without entitlement to disability benefits from the service.
On 27 September 1968, a physical examination indicated the applicant had asthma, which had existed prior to entrance (EPTS), and recommended his separation under Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-9.1 (Inductees who did not meet the medical fitness standards at time of induction).
On 10 October 1968, his induction was voided under the above cited regulation. Contrary to regulation, a DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) was issued which indicated that he had served 10 months and 3 days. He was authorized the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal, and the Combat Infantryman Badge.
On 9 November 1978, a VA Rating Decision denied service-connection for asthma.
On 16 July 1984, a VA Rating Decision denied service-connection for exposure to Agent Orange.
On 5 November 1994, a VA Rating Decision denied service-connection for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), indicating no satisfactory evidence of a stressor; however, that decision did indicate he was cocaine dependent - a product of the veterans own willful misconduct.
On 18 July 1996, a VA Rating Decision awarded him service-connected disability rating of 10 percent for PTSD, effective 7 March 1995. It further indicated non-service-connection for cocaine dependence and marijuana abuse.
Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-9.1 (e), indicates, in pertinent part, that Individuals whose inductions are void will be released from the custody and control of the Army by Special Orders. The Discharge Authority will not issue a discharge certificate or a DD Form 214. The following entry will be made in item 38, DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record): Released from military control by virtue of a void induction (cite Special Order number, SPN and issuing headquarters)....
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 applicant was erroneously issued a DD Form 214, in violation of Army Regulation 635-200.
3. The applicants implied allegation that he was medically fit for induction at the time of his entrance into the Army of the United States is not consistent with medical records or his request for Release by Virtue of Void Induction.
4. The evidence shows that the applicant requested his induction be voided and that he understood his release would be without entitlement to disability benefits.
5. The evidence in this case does not support his contention that there was an error or injustice in his separation from active duty.
6. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the appellants 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
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090014208
Item 77 shows the examining physician indicated the applicant qualified for "void induction UP paragraph 5-9.1, Army Regulation 635-200." In response to a Congressional inquiry on behalf of the applicant by his mother, a physical examination of the applicant was completed: a. records show the applicant had a medical evaluation on 27 September 1968 and on 9 October 1968 (on both occasions) his medical condition that existed prior to service was identified by the examining physician as...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140005793
Counsel requests correction of the applicant's DD Form 214 to show he was medically discharged in lieu of voidance of his induction. His records show he was separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-9, due to not meeting medical fitness standards at the time of induction. The records show the applicant's injury existed prior to service and was cause for rejection for induction under the provisions of Army Regulation 40-501, paragraph 2.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002066844C070402
His medical records are not available. There is no available evidence of record and the applicant provides none to show that he had any serious medical condition other than a hearing problem. There is no evidence of record to show the applicant was offered separation; however, if he had been and had he requested separation he could not be have been considered for any disability benefits administered by the Army.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150002163
The applicant states, in effect: * his discharge on 20 July 2012 was based on a medical evaluation which determined he suffered from asthma * this medical condition would have made it impossible for him to complete basic combat training * the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) later concluded his asthma was service-connected and gave him a disability rating of 30 percent; this rating was made effective 1 August 2012 * he contends the fact VA found a service-connection and gave him a 30...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090017964
The rater rated his performance of duties as better than most officers and the endorser rated his performance of duties as equaled by very few officers. The VA, which has neither the authority, nor the responsibility for determining physical fitness for military service, awards disability ratings to veterans for conditions that it determines were incurred during military service and subsequently affect the individuals civilian employability. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088884C070403
On 16 October 1968, the applicant submitted a request for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5, by reason of erroneous induction. In his request, he indicated that he understood that although he had been informed that he did not meet procurement medical fitness standards at the time of induction, he could request retention in the Army to complete the period of service for which he was inducted. The applicant submitted two requests for discharge and he...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140016893
Conclusions of Law: * The June 2002 RO decision that denied service connection for a GI disorder is final * New and material evidence had been received since the October 2004 decision and the claim for service connection for a GI disorder is reopened * The criteria for service connection for a GI disorder have been met c. New Evidence: * In June 2002, the RO denied service connection for GI disorder * The RO considered the applicant's service treatment records which showed that a Medical...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058201C070420
APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that at the time he was discharged he suffered from a post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), as a result of his tour of duty in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN), and that he was under a medical profile based on injuries he received in the RVN. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: This document shows he was administratively discharged on that date, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, by reason of unfitness, after completing 1...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110020442
However, his records contain a copy of his DD Form 214 which shows he was discharged in pay grade E-2 on 13 December 2004 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), paragraph 5-11, by reason of failure to meet procurement medical fitness standards. A medical proceeding, regardless of the date completed, must establish that a medical condition was identified by appropriate medical authority within 6 months of the Soldier's initial...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080002196
The DD Form 214 issued to him on the date of his separation confirms he was REFRAD under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of Expiration Term of Service (ETS) and that he was assigned SPN 201. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) contains the Armys awards policy. Absent any evidence showing the applicant was recommended or awarded the CIB by proper authority while serving on active duty, or that confirms his assignment to and personal participation with a...