| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Vic Whitney | Analyst |
| Ms. Joann Langston | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Richard T. Dunbar | Member | |
| Mr. Raymond J. Wagner | Member |
2. The applicant requests amendment of his retirement date by four additional days. In an amendment to his application he requests that he be placed on excess leave for five additional days for active duty credit.
3. The applicant states that he was informed that his retirement date would credit him with 20 years Active Federal Service (AFS). This is now adversely affecting his retirement benefits based on recent legislation.
4. The applicant’s military records show that he was serving on active duty in the pay grade of E-7. A 26 May 1992 Medical Evaluation Board found the applicant unfit for further military service and recommended him for a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB). On 17 September 1992, the Physical Disability Agency (PDA) made a final decision on behalf of the Secretary of the Army that the applicant be retired by reason of physical disability rated at 40 percent.
5. Effective 26 October 1992, the applicant was separated by reason of physical disability. He had 19 years, 11 months, and 27 days AFS.
6. Between 1993 and 1995 the Veterans Administration (VA) ruled that the applicant was 100 percent service connected disabled.
7. Title 10, U. S. Code, section 1413, provides special compensation for certain severely disabled soldiers. Effective 1 October 2001, eligible retired, disabled soldiers will receive a monthly payment if their disability is rated 70 percent or higher by the service concerned at the time of retirement or the Department of Veterans Affairs within 4 years following retirement.
8. Title 10, United States Code, chapter 61, provides disability retirement or separation for a member who is physically unfit to perform the duties of his office, rank, grade, or rating because of a disability incurred while entitled to basic pay.
9. Army Regulation 600-8-10 provides the policy for leaves and passes. It provides, in pertinent part, that excess leave is a nonchargeable absence granted for emergency or unusual circumstances. It also states that excess leave is without pay and allowances.
10. Information provided by the Physical Disability Agency indicates that their goal is to timely process all disability separations and retirements. Additionally, they do take note of those soldiers who are also approaching 20 years of AFS.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant was retired by reason of physical disability in accordance with law and regulation in effect at the time. There was no error or injustice in the applicant’s retirement by reason of physical disability.
2. Notwithstanding that the applicant was appropriately retired in a timely manner, it appears that his retirement on 26 October 1992, has worked an injustice on him by denying him a more favorable status.
3. It is reasonable to assume that the PDA would have directed his separation on 31 October 1992, if they had been cognizant of his pending 20 years of AFS. There was no apparent operational or medical necessity for an earlier separation.
4. Accepting the applicant’s request for 5 days of excess leave, from 27 to 31 October 1992, will allow him to be credited with 20 years AFS.
5. In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.
RECOMMENDATION:
That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case for the individual concerned be corrected by:
a. amending the order and the DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) that separated him to show his effective date of physical disability retirement as 31 October 1992, and his placement on the retired list as 1 November 1992, and;
b. correcting his record of service on his DD Form 214 to show in block 12b. “92 10 31” and block 12c. “15 00 26.”
BOARD VOTE:
_jl_____ __rd___ __rw____ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
____Joann Langston_
CHAIRPERSON
| CASE ID | AR2001060815 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020226 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | GRANT |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 136.01 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060010071
The applicant requests that his DA Form 199, Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) Proceedings, issued on 3 September 1985, be corrected to show that his retirement is based on a disability resulting from injury or disease received in line of duty as a direct result of armed conflict or caused by an instrumentality of war and incurred in line of duty during a period of war as defined by law; and that his disability resulted from a combat related injury as defined in 26 US Code, Section 104. The...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002082322C070215
The PDA concluded that the applicant should have had a fitness for duty PEB before he was medically separated from the ARNGUS and a PEB held in 1998 would have most likely found the applicant unfit for duty because of this back pain and rated at 20 percent, under VASRD Code 5293, and separated with severance pay. 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9509377C070209
He outlines the errors he believes were made by the Army in his treatment, in the lessening of the rating recommended by both informal and formal physical evaluation boards (PEBs) by the Physical Disability Agency (PDA), and that agencys subsequent conclusion that his condition was not incurred while he was in a duty status and, therefore, not entitled to be separated due to disability with severance or retired pay. In support of his application he submits letters from the civilian...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088765C070403
The MEB recommended the applicant be referred to a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) and was considered mentally competent for pay and administrative board purposes. states that when a service member on the TDRL refuses or fails to report for a required periodic physical examination or to provide medical records, their disability retired pay may be terminated. If the member does not undergo a periodic physical examination after disability retired pay has been terminated, they will be...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060015351
The applicant's military service records contain a copy of his DD Form 214, with an effective date of 19 March 2000. The applicant and his Counsel contend, in effect, that in the interest of justice the ABCMR should reconsider its original decision and correct the applicant's military service records to show that he completed 20 years net active service The bases of the request is their contention that the applicant forfeited 20 days PTDY in exchange for creditable active duty service, he...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100014079
The applicant provided a self-authored statement, sleep study, and a letter from a physician as new evidence that will be considered by the Board. This office stated that there was insufficient evidence to conclude that a PEB would have found the applicant unfit for sleep apnea in 2000 and that military disability compensation can only be provided if there was a finding of unfitness for that condition. The opinion stated the applicant: * was separated from the military with severance pay...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050002459C070206
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 1 December 2005 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20050002459 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. The DA Form 199 indicates that the members of the board suggested that since he had completed 15, but less than 20 years of qualifying service for Reserve retirement, he may wish to consider requesting continuance in...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080004767
He now requests that his records be corrected to show that his request for COAR status was approved and that he obtained his 20 qualifying years for non-regular retirement. The available evidence confirms that in conjunction with the PEB finding of unfitness, the applicant requested COAR status to complete 20 years of qualifying service for non-regular retired pay, and that the USAPDA supported this request. Accordingly, it would be appropriate and serve the interests of equity and justice...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9507477C070209
On 1 April 1992 an informal PEB concluded the applicant was physically unfit for continued service because of chronic low back pain following the October 1991 injury (MEB diagnosis 2 and 3). The board rated his disability at 10 percent in accordance with the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) Code 5295 and recommended that he be separated with disability severance pay. DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070000171
Chapter 6, of Army Regulation 635-40, pertains to continuation on active duty of unfit Soldiers. A COAD will be approved for any period of time up to the last day of the month in which the Soldier attains 20 years of active federal service for purposes of qualifying for length of service retirement. The evidence shows that the applicant concurred with the recommendation of the PEB to be discharged and his COAD, which was denied, prevented him from remaining on active duty to complete 20...