| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Deborah L. Brantley | Senior Analyst |
| Ms. Margaret K. Patterson | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Karol A. Kennedy | Member | |
| Mr. Richard T. Dunbar | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, disability retirement or separation. He notes, in effect, that he has rheumatic fever as a result of his military service and as such should have been medically retired or separated. He submits no evidence in support of his request.
PURPOSE: To determine whether the application was submitted within the time limit established by law, and if not, whether it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He entered active duty on 16 September 1948. His service medical records indicate he was hospitalized in May 1949 as a result of rheumatic fever and rheumatoid arthritis. He was ultimately returned to general service duties in June 1949.
In the spring of 1950 action was initiated by the applicant’s unit commander to administratively separate him from active duty under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-369. His commander noted in a statement that during conversations with the applicant he had to be continually reminded to speak more coherently, that he had, in effect, made inappropriate phone calls to the Red Cross and to a senior officer in the chain of command. He noted that the applicant was “quite belligerent in his attitude” and that he failed to “show his ability in various assignments in this organization without satisfactory reaction.”
A separation physical examination noted the applicant’s hospitalization for rheumatic fever and arthritis in 1949, but the evaluating physician found the applicant medically qualified for separation. The physician noted that there were no disqualifying mental or physical disabilities sufficient to warrant referral for disability processing.
The applicant appeared before a board of officers who concluded the applicant did not possess the required degree of adaptability for the military service and recommended that he be discharged for ineptness and lack of adaptability. The recommendation was approved and on 15 May 1950 the applicant was separated from active duty with a general discharge.
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 occurring 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.
Army Regulation 615-369, then in effect, provided the policy and procedures for the administrative separation of enlisted personnel for inaptitude, unsuitability (which meant a lack of the required degree of adaptability) or enuresis. The regulation could not be applied to persons who had any disqualifying mental or physical defect. An individual discharged for inaptitude or unsuitability was furnished a general discharge certificate.
Although the applicant may have been treated for rheumatic fever while in the military there is no evidence, nor has the applicant provided any, that it inhibited his ability to perform his military duties. There is no evidence which indicates he had a medically unfitting disability which required physical disability processing. Therefore, there is no basis for physical disability retirement or separation.
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. Failure to file within 3 years may be excused by a correction board if it finds it would be in the interest of justice to do so.
DISCUSSION: The alleged error or injustice was, or with reasonable diligence should have been discovered on 15 May 1950, the date the applicant was discharged. The time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 15 May 1953.
The application is dated 3 June 2001 and the applicant has not explained or otherwise satisfactorily demonstrated by competent evidence that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to apply within the time allotted.
DETERMINATION: The subject application was not submitted within the time required. The applicant has not presented and the records do not contain sufficient justification to conclude that it would be in the interest of justice to grant the relief requested or to excuse the failure to file within the time prescribed by law. Prior to reaching this determination the Board looked at the applicant's entire file. It was only after all aspects of his case had been considered and it had been concluded that there was no basis to recommend a correction of his record that the Board considered the statute of limitations. Had the Board determined that an error or injustice existed it would have recommended relief in spite of the applicant's failure to submit his application within the three-year time limit.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ EXCUSE FAILURE TO TIMELY FILE
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
__MKP__ __KAK __ __RTD __ CONCUR WITH DETERMINATION
| CASE ID | AR2001059202 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 20011002 |
| 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. | 142.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130013413
The applicant requests an upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge. The applicant's complete military records are not available to the Board for review. Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time, stated an honorable discharge was a separation with honor.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9610857C070209
He stated that he did not think has son was physically or mentally capable to be in the Army because he was not able to hold a job as a civilian. Testimony from both his current and former commanding officers and first sergeants indicate that the applicant was in a specialized unit, that he had a retiring personality, was capable of limited duties, and he was assigned jobs such as cleaning the day room or kitchen duty, which he did well and conscientiously, but that he could not perform any...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100012829
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). A review of the available records fails to show the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. _______ _ x _______ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9710335
On 27 April 1953, the commander recommended the applicant be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-369 for unsuitability. Army Regulation 615-369 set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel for inaptitude or unsuitability. All of the medical conditions diagnosed during the applicant’s several physical examinations existed prior to his entry in the military service and there is no evidence to show they were aggravated by his term in the service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9710335C070209
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his discharge be changed to a medical discharge. On 12 May 1953, the applicant appeared before a discharge board. All of the medical conditions diagnosed during the applicants several physical examinations existed prior to his entry in the military service and there is no evidence to show they were aggravated by his term in the service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001064717C070421
In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether the application was filed within the time established by statute, and if not, whether it would be in the interest of justice to waive the failure to timely file. He states that his report of medical examination dated 19 July 1954, five months prior to his induction, showed that his only prior existing medical conditions...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9508885BC070209
The elimination board found that the applicant was unfit for further service because of sexual perversion and continual misconduct, and recommended that he given an undesirable discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368. In view of the foregoing conclusions, the applicants records should be corrected as recommended below. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected: a. by showing that the individual concerned was separated from the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130004393
The applicant provides: * VA Rating Decision, dated 11 January 2013 * DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from the Armed Forces of the United States) CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant's military records are not available to the Board for review. However, her DD Form 214 shows she was discharged with a general discharge on 8 March 1951 under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-369 (Enlisted Personnel Discharge Inaptitude or Unsuitability).
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060015477
The FSM's WD AGO Form 53-57, Enlisted Record and Report of Separation Dishonorable Discharge, shows he was inducted on 9 June 1943 and entered active duty on the same date at the age of 20 years and 9 months. Her brother was sick with Rheumatic Fever and was admitted into the Government hospital. Medical-related records do show the FSM had contracted Rheumatic Fever in 1941, years before he was inducted into the Army.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058975C070421
In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. The applicant requests...