| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Deborah L. Brantley | Senior Analyst |
| Mr. John N. Slone | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Christopher J. Prosser | Member | |
| Mr. Lester Echols | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, disability retirement.
APPLICANT STATES: He states that he met the qualifications for disability retirement at the time of his separation but was not afforded the opportunity to appear before a PEB (Physical Evaluation Board). He notes he had less than 20 years of military service and was medically unfit to continue his military service due to “line of duty disabilities at the time of separation” which he states “were greater than 20%.” In support of his request he submits a November 1999 VA document indicating he was receiving a combined service connected disability rating of 30 percent following his separation from active duty in 1997 which was subsequently increased to 40 percent in 1999.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He entered active duty on 3 August 1994 for a period of 3 years and 20 weeks. He was promoted to pay grade E-4 on 3 October 1996.
Information contained on an informal line of duty investigation indicates that the applicant “suffered a crush[ed] right foot” on 15 February 1997 as a result of a motor vehicle accident between a tank and a “5.ton vehicle.” The investigation notes that the turret of the tank was hit by the truck “causing the turret to spin out of control which resulted in the gunner [the applicant’s] leg to become caught and fractured.”
The applicant continued to serve on active duty until 19 December 1997 when he was released from active duty with an honorable characterization of service at the conclusion of his enlistment contract. His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code was “1” indicating that he was fully qualified for reenlistment.
Subsequent to his separation he was awarded a combined 30 percent disability rating by VA effective 20 December 1997 which was increased to 40 percent in June 1999.
Army Regulation 635-40 states that disability compensation is not an entitlement acquired by reason of service-incurred illness or injury; rather, it is provided to soldiers whose service is interrupted and they can no longer continue to reasonably perform because of a physical disability incurred or aggravated in service. When a soldier is being processed for separation or retirement for reasons other than physical disability, continued performance of assigned duty commensurate with his or her rank or grade until the soldier is scheduled for separation or retirement, creates a presumption that the soldier is fit. The presumption of fitness may be overcome if the evidence establishes that the soldier was, in fact, physically unable to perform adequately the duties of his or her office, grade, rank or rating for a period of time because of disability. There must be a causative relationship between the less than adequate duty performance and the unfitting medical condition or conditions. The presumption of fitness may also be overcome by an acute, grave illness or injury or other significant deterioration of the soldier’s physical condition occurred immediately prior to, or coincident with processing for separation or retirement for reasons other than physical disability and which rendered the soldier unfit for further duty. There is no evidence, and the applicant has not provided any, which confirms he was unable to perform his military duties at the time of separation and as such there is no basis for disability retirement.
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. Furthermore, unlike the Army the VA can evaluate a veteran throughout his or her lifetime, adjusting the percentage of disability based upon that agency's examinations and findings.
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. Although the applicant may have suffered an injury to his foot which was determined to have occurred in the line of duty his continued performance of duty until his separation from active duty in December 1997 raised a presumption of fitness which he has not overcome by evidence of any unfitting, acute, grave illness or injury concomitant with his separation.
2. The evidence of record indicates he did not have any medically unfitting disability which required physical disability processing. Therefore, there is no basis for physical disability retirement or separation.
3. A rating action by the VA does not necessarily demonstrate any error or injustice by the Army. The VA, operating under its own policies and regulations, assigns disability ratings as it sees fit. Any rating action by the VA does not compel the Army to modify its reason or authority for separation.
4. 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 that requirement.
5. 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
___jns__ ____cjp_ ____le__ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001053368 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 20010329 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | YYYYMMDD |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR . . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | Deny |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 108.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100011455
The applicant requests her narrative reason for discharge be changed from parenthood to a medical retirement. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. Even though the applicant states she has received a 90 percent disability rating by the VA, the award of VA compensation does not mandate disability retirement or separation from the Army.
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 | 2001057014C070420
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT STATES : That he contracted HIV while in the service. In a 7 March 2000 decision by the Board of Veterans’ Appeal, that board noted that the June 1998 rating decision assigned a 10 percent disability rating for the applicant’s HIV-related illness.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9610330C070209
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his military records be corrected to show that he was retired by reason of physical disability. There is no evidence of record, nor has the applicant submitted sufficient evidence which would indicate that his mental disorder was of such severity while he was serving on active duty that he should have been referred through a medical evaluation board to a physical evaluation board. The Army must find that a service member is physically unfit to reasonably perform...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9606022C070209
Although the she had numerous medical problems throughout her career, service medical records do not indicate any medical condition incurred while entitled to receive basic pay which was so severe as to render the applicant medically unfit for retention on active duty. Accordingly, the applicant was separated from active duty for reasons other than physical disability. The Army must find unfitness for duty at the time of separation before a member may be medically retired or separated.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9510722C070209
The applicant himself stated that he did not desire a medical examination for separation from active duty. Six days after his release from active duty he underwent a medical examination for the purpose of enlisting in the Army National Guard and was determined to be medically fit for enlistment. The Army must find unfitness for duty at the time of separation before a member may be medically retired or separated.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9508063C070209
The VA, however, is not required by law to determine medical unfitness for further military service. The medical evidence of record indicates that the applicant was medically fit for retention at the time of his separation. Records provided by the VA indicate that the applicant has been awarded compensation for medical conditions which that agency has determined to be related to military service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130021692
He was honorably released from active duty on 4 February 2012 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), chapter 4, by reason of completion of required active service. The Army rates only conditions determined to be physically unfitting at the time of discharge which disqualify the Soldier from further military service. He does not state what specific physical or behavioral health condition made him medically unfit for military...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130016278
The applicant was released from active duty on 6 July 2010 by reason of completion of required service. The applicant has not provided and the record does not contain any evidence that he was not able to perform his assigned duties following his 8 January 2010 injuries. The applicant has not provided and the available record does not contain any service medical records affording him a diagnosis of a TBI, PTSD, or migraine headaches, the three principle conditions for which he was granted...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9607940C070209
The applicant did not have any medically unfitting disability which required physical disability processing. The VA has determined that the applicant did not have a bipolar disorder, but PTSD and has rated her 50 percent disabling because of that condition. The VA is not required to determine fitness for duty at the time of separation.