| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Deborah L. Brantley | Senior Analyst |
| Mr. John N. Slone | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Richard T. Dunbar | Member | |
| Mr. Donald P. Hupman, Jr. | Member |
2. The applicant requests that his 1989 DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be corrected to reflect award of the Legion of Merit. He also asks that a statement be added to his DD Form 214 to indicate that he “was awarded a 20 percent disability as a result of combat action.” The applicant states that he was awarded a Legion of Merit upon his retirement from active duty in 1989 but the award was omitted from his separation report. He also states, in effect, that subsequent to this retirement from active duty he was awarded disability compensation by the VA for prostate cancer which the VA attributed to his exposure to Agent Orange during the Vietnam War. He notes that he needs the statement on his separation document in order to have his military service credited as part of his civilian employment service time. In support of his request he submits copies of orders awarding him the Legion of Merit and documents from the VA confirming his receipt of disability compensation.
3. Information available to the Board indicates that the applicant entered active duty in 1966 and served continuously until he retired for length of service in 1989. On 14 February 1989 orders were issued by the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel in Washington, D.C. awarding the applicant a Legion of Merit in recognition of his meritorious service during the period 1 February 1979 through 28 February 1989. The award, however, was omitted from his DD Form 214.
4. Subsequent to his retirement the VA awarded him a 100 percent disability rating for “prostate cancer due to Agent Orange Exposure” which was subsequently reduced to 20 percent effective 1 April 2000 when his “records noted improvement in [his] service-connected residuals, radical prostatectomy due to prostate cancer with resultant urinary stress incontinence….” The original 100 percent rating was effective on 1 December 1999.
5. Included with the applicant’s petition to the Board was a memorandum from him to the Human Resources Office of the D.C. Public Schools. In that memorandum the applicant cited a retirement plan for teachers which indicated that "If you served in the armed forces and received an honorable discharge, you can get credited for that time. However, you may not receive credit for any time for which you receive a military pension, unless that pension is awarded as the result of a disability incurred during combat or certain other activities in the line of duty.”
6. Army Regulation 635-5 establishes the policies and provisions for the preparation and distribution of the DD Form 214. It states, in pertinent part, that the DD Form 214 is a summary of a soldier’s most recent period of continuous active duty. It provides a brief, clear-cut record of active duty service at the time of release from active duty, retirement, or discharge. The regulation permits a variety of required entries in item 18 (remarks) of the form but does not permit the entry of subsequent disability compensation issues under the jurisdiction of the VA.
7. 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 solider 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.
8. Army Regulation 635-40 states that a soldier who is determined to be physically unfit for continued service is eligible for disability retired pay if he has a rating of less than 30 percent and has 20 years of active service for retirement.
9. Monetary benefits, awarded by the VA, are referred to as disability compensation and are paid to veterans who are disabled by injury or disease incurred or aggravated during active military service. Monetary benefits are related to the residual effects of the injury or disease and are not subject to federal or state income tax. The payment of military retirement pay, disability severance pay, and separation incentive payments affect the amount of VA compensation payable.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. The evidence confirms the applicant was awarded a Legion of Merit for meritorious service prior to his retirement from active duty and his record should be corrected accordingly.
2. However, the evidence of record indicates that the applicant was physically fit at the time of his retirement by reason of length of service and as such is not receiving military disability retirement pay based on that service. The fact that he was subsequently awarded VA disability compensation based on prostrate cancer attributed to his exposure to Agent Orange is not a basis to correct his DD Form 214, nor are there any provisions to capture that information on the separation report.
3. In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the individual concerned was awarded the Legion of Merit.
2. That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.
BOARD VOTE:
__JNS __ __RTD _ __DPH__ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
_____John N. Slone ____
CHAIRPERSON
| CASE ID | AR2001061004 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 20010828 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | YYYYMMDD |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR . . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | GRANT |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 107.00 |
| 2. | 110.00 |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20120000695
The applicant states errors in his medical documentation at the time of his retirement were supposed to have been corrected to show that his disability retirement was the result of an instrumentality of war, specifically Agent Orange. The advisory opinion noted that the ABCMR corrected the applicant's records in 1988 to show his back condition was the result of instrumentality of war. The applicant has not provided and the record does not contain any evidence that he was suffering from any...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050003543C070206
Richard T. Dunbar | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. Due to cost constraints, while all military retirees will eventually receive concurrent receipt of VA disability compensation, only those military retirees who have disabilities incurred in combat, or in conditions simulating combat (which includes hazardous duties), are eligible for CRSC. In view of the preceding conclusions, there is...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 04101591C070208
Ronald Weaver | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. On 7 October 1998 this Board granted his request for award of the Purple Heart for a wound from a fragmentation grenade that he received in Vietnam in 1969. The evidence shows that the applicant has medical conditions caused by his exposure to chemical agents during his service in Vietnam.
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-04103
In support of his request, the applicant provided a personal statement and documentation associated with his CRSC application. The available evidence of record does not support a finding that the service-connected medical condition the applicant believes is combat-related was incurred as the direct result of armed conflict, while engaged in hazardous service, in the performance of duty under conditions simulating war, or through an instrumentality of war; and, therefore, does not qualify...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140011901
The applicant provides copies of his medical records and CRSC claim. He was also informed that documentation he submitted failed to provide evidence to link his requested conditions to a combat-related event and the disapproval is now considered final. There is no evidence to show his skin condition(s) for which he is receiving service-connected compensation is related to or was caused while participating in hazardous duty, in training that simulated war, in a combat-related event, or in...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110012162
The applicant requests that his tuberculosis be approved for Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC). The applicant states his medical records prove conclusively that his tuberculosis was caused, or aggravated, by his participation in armed conflict in Vietnam. In the NARSUM it was stated that the applicant had been in Vietnam for 16 months prior to his admission to the hospital.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100007357
He also requests that correction be made to his DA Form 199 (Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) Proceedings), dated 1978. The applicant requests his DA Form 199 be corrected to show his disability resulted from an instrumentality of war. As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to award of the Purple Heart and Military Outstanding Volunteer Service Medal or correction of his DA Form 199.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140018833
Personnel who were physically unfit for retention per Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness), chapter 3, were not to be separated because of expiration term of service unless processing for separation because of physical disability was waived. Army Regulation 601-280 (Total Army Retention Program) prescribes procedures to deny reenlistment (through a field commander's bar to reenlistment) to Soldiers whose immediate separation under administrative procedures is not warranted...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9605094C070209
The VA has determined that his cancer is service connected, and has granted him a disability rating for that condition. The applicants ratings on his NCOERs conclusively show that he was physically fit to perform the duties of his grade and MOS at the time of his retirement. If the VA has assigned the applicant a rating (he did not include his VA records) for his cancer, that action would be in keeping with the prescribed function of that agency; i.e., to provide medical care and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090002403
The applicant requests, in effect, that his records be corrected to show his malignant schwannoma [nerve sheath tumor] was determined to have been incurred as a direct result of armed conflict, specially hazardous military duty, training exercises that simulate war, or caused by an instrumentality of war and that this disability is eligible for award of Combat-Related Special Compensation (CRSC). Incurring disabilities while in a theater of operations or in training exercises is not, in and...