| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Edmund P. Mercanti | Analyst |
| Ms. June Hajjar | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Harry B. Oberg | Member | |
| Ms. Celia L. Adolphi | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that her discharge for the convenience of the Government with Special Separation Benefits (SSB), be corrected to a medical retirement. It would appear that she is also requesting that her Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) disability pension not be offset by her military separation pay.
APPLICANT STATES: In 1990 a medical board determined that she was physically unfit, but when she requested that she be retained and returned to duty, the medical board honored her request. However, now the DVA is recouping her separation pay which is creating a financial hardship for her. It is implied that if she had received a medical retirement, she would not have this offset and would not have this financial difficulty.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
She enlisted on 9 June 1978 with 2 years, 7 months and 24 days of prior active service. She served as a food service specialist and through subsequent reenlistments was promoted to pay grade E-7.
On 30 May 1990 a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) convened and determined that the applicant was physically fit to perform her duties. As such, she was released to perform duty within the confines of her physical profile. The applicant’s health records are not part of her military records.
In 1992 the applicant submitted a request to be separated with SSB payment. Her request was approved and she was honorably released from active duty on 6 August 1992 with $58,810.59 as an SSB payment.
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 PEB for a determination of whether they are able to perform the duties of their grade and military specialty with the medically disqualifying condition. For example, a noncommissioned officer who receives above average evaluation reports and passes Army Physical Fitness Tests (which have been modified to comply with the individual’s physical profile limitations) after the individual was diagnosed as having the medical disqualification would probably be found to be fit for duty. The fact that the individual has a medically disqualifying condition does not mandate the person’s separation from the service. Fitness for duty, within the parameters of the individual’s grade and military specialty, is the determining factor in regards to separation. If the PEB determines that an individual is physically unfit, it recommends the percentage of disability to be awarded which, in turn, determines whether an individual will be discharged with severance pay or retired. An Army disability rating is intended to compensate an individual for interruption of a military career after it has been determined that the individual suffers from an impairment that disqualifies him or her from further military service. In this regard, the Army rates only conditions determined to be physically unfitting, thus compensating the individual for loss of a career.
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. Since the applicant was determined physically fit and returned to a duty status, there was no basis for medically retiring her.
2. The Board notes that the applicant requested her separation herself and received a sizable SSB payment as a result of her approved request.
3. The actions taken by the DVA are not within the purview of this Board. The applicant must petition that Department for redress on any issue she may have with her DVA disability pension.
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
____jh __ ___hbo__ __cla ___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001051243 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | YYYYMMDD |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | YYYYMMDD |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR . . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | (NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 108.05 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040009354C070208
The applicant states, in effect, that: a. she regards the rating decision made by the PEB as unfair because she was not rated for her lower back condition; b. when she was initially rated at zero percent by the PEB, she was still undergoing testing for her lower back; c. that she was assured by her counselor that because she was still undergoing treatment the PEB would return her to duty until she completed treatment or was rated by the PEB; d. that she was rated 10 percent by the PEB but...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080005518
Once a Soldier is determined to be physically unfit for further military service, percentage ratings are applied to the unfitting conditions from the VASRD. There is no evidence available to show that the applicant was unfit for military service because of her left knee injury. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by offering her the opportunity to undergo a physical evaluation to determine her fitness for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060011240
Those members who do not meet medical retention standards will be referred to a physical evaluation board (PEB) for a determination of whether they are able to perform the duties of their grade and military specialty with the medically disqualifying condition. There is no evidence of record and the applicant has not submitted any evidence to show he was unable to perform his normal duties due to his medical condition. The DVA, which has neither the authority nor the responsibility for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120004497
The applicant requests correction of her military service records to reflect all her disabilities and by correcting the disability rating assigned by the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB). There is no evidence in the applicant's military medical records that show she was unfit for duty due to left knee strain or right foot pain. Evidence shows that the MEB and PEB properly considered the applicant's medical condition.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003084381C070212
APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that a formal Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) increased his disability rating to 20 percent in 1985 and he received severance pay in the amount of $5146.20. The Board considered the applicant's request that his military records be corrected to show a disability rating of 20 percent instead of 10 percent. However, the applicant's military records show that he was discharged on 21 October 1985 by reason of physical disability with severance pay (20 percent) with...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050000133C070206
On 24 August 2005, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records notified the DAV of the applicant's pending application and requested that they review his records within 30 days. Those members who do not meet medical retention standards will be referred to a physical evaluation board (PEB) for a determination of whether they are able to perform the duties of their grade and military specialty with the medically disqualifying condition. There is no evidence of record and the applicant...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060015226
Based on the applicant having less than 20 years of service and a disability rating at less than 30 percent, he was, therefore, separated with entitlement to disability severance pay instead of a disability retirement consistent with law and regulation. The Army must find that a service member is physically unfit to reasonably perform his or her duties and assign an appropriate disability rating before he or she can be medically retired or separated. As provided for in law, the DVA has...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090006666
The applicant requests, in effect, that her disability rating be increased to 30 percent or more (i.e., a medical retirement). However, evidence of record shows the PEB found her physically unfit due to chronic bilateral knee pain only and she was rated 0 percent for slight/occasional pain. Consequently, due to the two concepts involved, an individuals medical condition may not be considered to be a physical disability by the Army and yet be rated by the DVA as a disability.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080005855
The formal PEB is not available; however, the advisory opinion states that on 5 May 2004 a formal PEB found the applicant physically unfit for the same conditions as the informal PEB, but reduced her back rating to 10 percent based on tenderness to palpations being the only existing ratable criteria. The advisory opinion concluded that the applicant had not provided any evidence of PEB error and the documents provided to the ABCMR were not new evidence that has not been considered by the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090004461
The applicant was rated under the DVA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) and was granted a 10-percent disability rating for code 5241 (chronic low back pain) and a 10-percent disability rating for codes 5299 and 5237. Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation), establishes the Army physical disability evaluation system and sets forth policies, responsibilities, and procedures that apply in determining whether a Soldier is unfit because of...