| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Lee Cates | Analyst |
| Mr. Raymond J. Wagner | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Kathleen A. Newman | Member | |
| Mr. Ronald E. Blakely | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That he be medically retired.
APPLICANT STATES: That the basis for this request is that the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) awarded him a 30 percent disability rating for asthma based on their physician rewriting a prescription for Azmacort. He provided medical documentation showing six occasions between 1996 and 1999 where he complained of and was treated for asthma.
COUNSEL CONTENDS: That the Former Service Member requests a medical retirement based on award of a 30 percent disability rating by the VA, which has not been submitted for review. Due to all records not being submitted for review, an adequate argument cannot be provided. Careful and sympathetic consideration is requested in rendering a fair and impartial decision.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's available military and medical records show:
On 29 September 1989, he enlisted in the Army Reserve Delayed Enlistment Program.
On 31 January 1990, he enlisted in the Regular Army for 4 years.
During the period 7 November 1996 and 29 June 1999, he complained of and was treated for asthma on six occasions. He was directed to remove cats from his home and stop smoking on a trial basis. There is indication that he removed the cats from the bedroom, however, the records indicate he did not stop smoking.
On 5 December 1997, he declined to extend or reenlist for an overseas assignment and his records were flagged to prevent him from receiving any favorable personnel actions, precluding his reenlistment.
On 28 February 1999, he was honorably discharged under Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 4, based on the expiration of his term of service. His separation document indicates he had 9 years and 1 month of creditable service. He was not found medically unfit.
An award of a VA rating does not establish entitlement to medical retirement or separation from the Army. Operating under its own policies and regulations, the VA, which has neither the authority nor the responsibility for determining medical unfitness for military duty, awards ratings because a medical condition is related to service ("service-connected") and affects the individual's civilian employability. Furthermore, the VA can evaluate a veteran throughout their lifetime, adjusting the percentage of disability based upon that agency's examinations and findings.
The Army must find that a service member is physically unfit to reasonably perform their duties and assign an appropriate disability rating before they can be medically retired or separated.
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. The applicant did not have any medically unfitting disability, which required physical disability processing. Therefore, there is no basis for physical disability retirement or separation.
2. The medical evidence of record indicates that the applicant was medically fit for retention at the time of his separation. Neither the applicant nor counsel has submitted any probative medical evidence to the contrary.
3. The fact that the VA, in its discretion, has awarded the applicant a disability rating is a prerogative exercised within the policies of that agency. It does not, in itself, establish physical unfitness for Department of the Army purposes.
4. In the absence of medical evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the available service records are correct as presently constituted.
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
_kan____ _reb____ _reb____ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001058989 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20011025 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 108.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
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...
AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00737
The PEB rating reflected presumptive application of DoDI 1332.39 since lumbar ROM was not measured as required by the VASRD, but its 10% determination was consistent with application of §4.59 (painful motion) or §4.40 (pain with use). Service Treatment Record I have carefully reviewed the evidence of record and the recommendation of the Board.
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00146
As noted above, the Army PEB found him unfit, and he was medically separated with a 10% disability rating. His lung exam was normal, with no wheezes noted. The Board does not have the authority to render fitness or rating recommendations for any conditions not considered by the DES.
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00192
In 2002 the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) determined she was unfit for continued naval service secondary to Major Depressive Disorder. A Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) was done and in 1997 the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) determined she should enter the TDRL with a rating of 30%. She was on medication at every evaluation performed by the VA and the Navy except for her third TDRL evaluation.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002073073C070403
On 15 April 1996, the Army Recruiting Command Surgeon indicated she was medically disqualified, but granted the applicant a medical waiver for her history of asthma with a physical profile of 211111B. It was also noted by members of the MMRB that she had this medical condition prior to military service. It also provides for the physical disability retirement of a member who has at least 20 years of service or a disability rated at least 30 percent.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120003542
The applicant also states his medical retirement with a 30% disability rating was only based on his condition of asthma. His record contains a DA Form 3349 (Physical Profile), dated 13 April 2005, that shows his medical conditions at the time as: Asthma and Chronic left knee pain. The applicant's record is void of any evidence and he did not provide any evidence that shows he appeared before a promotion board for consideration to the rank/grade of SGT/E-5 at any time during his service or...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004101238C070208
On 28 December 1999, an informal PEB found the applicant to be physically unfit and recommended his separation with severance pay with a zero percent disability rating. On 24 January 2000, the applicant completed the reverse of the DA Form 199 and indicated that he concurred with the findings and recommendation of the informal PEB and waived a formal hearing of his case. Title 10, U. S. Code, section 1203, provides for the physical disability separation of a member who has less than 20...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130002675
e. A DA Form 199 (PEB Proceedings) that shows on 25 May 2004 an informal PEB reviewed the applicant's DD Form 2808, dated 21 April 2004, along with his medical records and found him physically unfit due to bilateral knee pain with a history of separate injuries to both knees and degenerative arthritis. The applicant contends his records should be corrected to show he was retired due to physical disability because the MEB and PEB only considered his bilateral knee pain and failed to consider...
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01920
The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to review of medical records and all available evidence for application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. There is no evidence in this case that OSA was associated with any functional impairment that was not corrected by CPAP. I have carefully reviewed the evidence of record and the recommendation of the Board.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9506129C070209
He states he should have been medically retired from the military when he was released from active duty in 1991. He states that he is suffering from medical conditions (right ankle and shoulder pain and asthma) for which he received treatment while on active duty. It appears that the applicant was a member of the Army Reserve following his release from active duty and underwent several periodic medical examinations; all of which found him medically qualified for continued service.