APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, physical disability retirement.
APPLICANT STATES: In November 1991 he reenlisted in the Indiana Army National Guard (INARNG) for the purpose of serving until his retirement. Even though he passed the Over 40 Physical and the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) test he was forced out with an honorable discharge, without a disability pension or severance pay.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
The applicant served on active duty from 17 March 1966 to 2 June 1975.
He enlisted in the INARNG on 10 June 1986 and was a member of the 438th Chemical Company. He was the Senior Mechanic/ Assistant Motor Sergeant in a Maintenance Platoon.
On 6 March 1992 the applicants doctor submitted a statement that the applicant had been treated for a chronic recurring lumbar spine condition since 1985 and suffered from degenerative disc disease (DDD) of the lumbar spine.
In a memorandum dated 18 March 1992, the applicants unit requested a medical evaluation.
On 4 April 1992 the State medical officer determined that the applicant was not medically qualified for continued military service, in accordance with paragraph 3-14a(3) of AR 40-501. His discharge was directed on 31 May 1992.
On 20 April 1992 the applicant requested reconsideration of his separation, which voided his separation.
Subsequently, his command requested a waiver for retention purposes. The commanding officer stated that the applicant was a vital and valuable asset to the command. He noted that the applicant participated in physical training (PT) much to his discomfort, which necessitated his going to his doctor after drill to receive therapy for his back. The commander stated that the applicant did pass the APFT in October 1991, however, he had problems with the run and sit-up portion.
On 17 June 1992, the Chief Surgeon, Army National Guard concluded that the applicant did not meet retention standards as his condition, DDD, is one of continued progression of symptoms and loss of physical capability. The applicants abilities were noted, and it was suggested that if his unit wished to retain him a waiver would be approved. However, he would have to be assigned a permanent profile, with numerous restrictions and assigned to a nondeployable unit.
Attempts were made to find a position for the applicant in the INARNG which would meet his medical limitations. As none were available, his discharge was directed on 30 September 1992.
On 30 September 1992 the applicant was honorably released from the Army National Guard, medically unfit for retention, under the provisions of Army Regulation 40-501.
In 1994 the applicant attempted to enlist in the INARNG. He was found not physically qualified.
The Boards medical advisor, in a comment (COPY ATTACHED), to the Board, noted that there is no record in the applicants medical record of treatment for back pain by a physician either while he was on active duty nor while he was in the INARNG. Additionally, there is no record of any trauma which caused the applicants pain. Rather, DDD is a process of aging. Whether the applicant passed his APFT or a physical is immaterial to DDD. Finally, he opined that the applicant failed to submit medical evidence that he was medically disqualified due to an incident while on duty with the National Guard, or that the National Guard aggravated a pre-existent condition.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion(s), it is concluded:
1. It should be noted that ones ability to pass the APFT or a physical before an impairment is detected, does not, in itself, constitute service-connection or a right to receive severance pay or medical retirement from the Army.
2. Whether or not an individual is able to pass an APFT or even a physical is immaterial to whether that individual met
military retention standards. The applicants contention do not demonstrate error or injustice in the disposition of his case by his separation for the National Guard
3. 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
4. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicants 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 | CY2014 | 20140001368
The PEB found although the condition stretched back to 2005, the applicant first reported right shoulder pain during demobilization at Fort Benning in 2010. A physical disability shall be considered combat-related if it makes the member unfit or contributes to unfitness and was incurred a direct result of armed conflict, while engaged in hazardous service, under conditions simulating war, or caused by an instrumentality of war. Without conclusive evidence to establish a direct, causal...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140008718
The applicant requests correction of correction of DA Form 199 (Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) Proceedings), dated 11 August 2009, to show in: * item 8b (Disability Description), his chronic low back pain with right L5 radiculitis occurred as a result of falling to the ground from an Apache helicopter * item 10 (If Retired Because of Disability, the Board Makes the Recommended Finding That), his retirement was based on disability from an injury or disease received in the line of duty (LOD)...
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 01001
A physical therapy (PT) entry a month later, however, documented flexion limited to 30 degrees (normal 90 degrees) and, the MEB physical exam a month after that (3 months pre-separation) noted “limited” ROM and antalgic gait.An earlier entry of April 2006 (7 months pre-separation) documented flexion “20%” (unclear if % reduction or % normal) but, no other STR entries documented grossly decreased ROM or abnormal gait (one specifying normal gait and anothernormal ROM). There is thus no...
AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-00507
The chronic low back pain(LBP) condition, characterized as “mechanical low back pain,” was forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501.The MEB also identified and forwarded two other conditions (bilateral knee pain and bilateral low-frequency hearing loss) for PEB adjudication.The Informal PEB adjudicated“chronic low back pain,”as unfitting, rated at 10% with likely application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).The remaining two conditions...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070013423
The applicant provides copies of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty); his DVA Rating Decisions, dated 9 July 2007 and 27 November 2007; his service medical records (SMRs); and his DVA medical records, in support of his application. The applicant's SMRs show continuous treatment of his LBP and neck pain until his discharge. Although the applicant's LBP condition is well documented in his SMRs, there is no evidence that his military service was interrupted...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001061447C070421
On 30 June 1995 the California Army National Guard informed her that her medical records had been reviewed by a medical evaluation board (MEB) conducted from 1 April 1995 through 31 May 1995 and that the board found her unfit for retention in accordance with Army Regulation 40-501, chapter 3. In a 13 May 1999 advisory opinion regarding her 8 October 1997 application to this Board requesting a medical discharge, the Army Review Boards Medical Advisor noted that she had been discharged...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130018458
Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation) establishes the Army Physical Disability Evaluation System (PDES) and sets forth policies, responsibilities, and procedures that apply in determining whether a Soldier is unfit because of physical disability to reasonably perform the duties of his or her office, grade, rank, or rating. The Army must find that a service member is physically unfit to reasonably perform his or her duties and assign an...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130008282
(4) On 26 March 2004, the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) considered his bilateral knee pain due to patellofemoral arthritis unfit, existed prior to service and permanently aggravated by an LOD injury on 12 August 2003. (4) His orders show he has 20 years of service and his DD Form 214 states he was discharged with severance pay. The evidence of record shows he later submitted a statement requesting his medical board paperwork be reevaluated to increase his disability rating to 40% for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140008139
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. A DA Form 2173 (Statement of Medical Examination and Duty Status), dated 24 August 2000, shows he was treated on 18 August 2000 at the Troop Medical Clinic (TMC), Camp Beauregard, LA, for an injury that was incurred on that date. Medical records, dated between 18 August 2000 and 25 February 2002, show he was treated as follows: a.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003085063C070212
The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant states that he completed all phases of the Sergeants Major Academy Non-Resident Course, but did not pass the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) due to a medical condition (degenerative disc disease) and was dismissed from the course on 10 July 2002. June 2001, and July 2000, all showing the applicant's performance as a Sergeant Major with date of rank of 1 May 2000; a copy...