| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mrs. Nancy Amos | Analyst |
| Mr. Luther L. Santiful | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Joe R. Schroeder | Member | |
| Mr. Charles Gainor | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his disability rating be increased from 60 to 100 percent.
APPLICANT STATES: The VA has rated him as 100 percent disabled due to post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) directly related to his military service since his discharge for disability in 1992. He provides his VA ratings as supporting evidence.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
After having had prior service, he was commissioned in the Army National Guard on 7 August 1965. On 26 November 1990, he was ordered to active duty with his unit in support of Desert Shield/Storm.
The applicant’s medical evaluation board (MEB) and physical evaluation board (PEB) paperwork is not available. On 26 August 1992, the applicant was permanently retired by reason of physical disability with a disability rating of 60 percent.
In December 1998, the VA awarded the applicant a combined disability rating of 70 percent (cervical spine with surgical decompression, 60 percent and low back pain, 20 percent). In August 2000, the VA awarded him service connection for PTSD with an evaluation of 100 percent effective 10 October 1995.
Army Regulation 635-40 governs the evaluation of physical fitness of soldiers who may be unfit to perform their military duties because of physical disability. The regulation defines “physically unfit” as unfitness due to physical disability. The unfitness is of such a degree that a soldier is unable to perform the duties of his office, grade, rank or rating in such a way as to reasonably fulfill the purposes of his employment on active duty.
The VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) is the standard under which percentage rating decisions are to be made for disabled military personnel. The VASRD is primarily used as a guide for evaluating disabilities resulting from all types of diseases and injuries encountered as a result of, or incident to, military service. Unlike the VA, the Army must first determine whether or not a soldier is fit to reasonably perform the duties of his office, grade, rank or rating. Once a soldier is determined to be physically unfit for further military service, percentage ratings are applied to the unfitting conditions from the VASRD.
Title 38, U. S. 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.
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. 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 this requirement.
2. The rating action by the VA does not necessarily demonstrate an error or injustice on the part of the Army. The VA, operating under its own policies and regulations, assigns disability ratings as it sees fit. The VA is not required by law to determine medical unfitness for further military service in awarding a disability rating, only that a medical condition reduces or impairs the social or industrial adaptability of the individual concerned. Consequently, due to the two concepts involved (i. e., the more stringent standard by which a soldier is determined not to be medically fit for duty versus the standard by which a civilian would be determined to be socially or industrially impaired), an individual’s medical condition, if identified, may be determined by the Army to be not unfitting but the VA may award it a disability rating. There is no evidence to show that the applicant’s PTSD made him unfit for military service and the VA awarded him disability for this condition effective 1995, three years after his separation.
3. 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
__lls___ __jrs___ __cg____ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001061202 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20011010 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | (DENY) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 108.02 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080001289
Once a Soldier is determined to be physically unfit for further military service, percentage ratings are applied to the unfitting conditions from the VASRD. Although the applicant contends that his medical conditions were not properly considered by the medical board and that he was not given adequate time to provide medical information to the board from his doctors but was discharged, he has not provided any evidence to show his medical conditions were not properly considered. Although the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070011342C080213
He was sent to a medical board and was given less than a 30 percent disability rating. The VA, however, is not required by law to determine medical unfitness for further military service. The applicant stated that the VA gave him a 40 percent disability rating for his seizures and a 30 percent rating for his migraine headaches, which the Army did not even consider.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080008720
That advisor stated, "The applicant requests a rating for all his conditions because the VA rated all his conditions. Evidence shows that the PEB properly considered the applicant's medical conditions. Although the VA determined that he met the VASRD standard for a 50 percent disability rating for his sleep apnea, there is no evidence to show that the applicant was unfit to perform his military duties because of sleep apnea.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004101353C070208
Counsel states that the applicant requested his case be heard by a formal Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) and that he be retired by reason of disability due to both chronic leukemia and hypothyroidism. Counsel provides the DA Form 199 (Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) Proceedings) for the formal PEB and related formal PEB documents; the applicant's appeal of the PEB findings; the applicant's DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty); an extract from the Merck Manual...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070007633
The applicant requests that his disability with severance pay discharge be changed to a medical retirement. On 8 August 2005, an MEB referred the applicant to a PEB for diagnoses of: (1) PTSD, chronic, combat related; (2) sensor neural hearing loss, bilateral; (3) cervical spondylosis without myelopathy; (4) agoraphobia without panic disorder (medically acceptable); (5) partner relationship problems (medically acceptable); and (6) nicotine dependence (medically acceptable). On 21 February...
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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001064272C070421
The evidence of record shows that the applicant was physically fit to perform his duties at the time of his separation from active duty. Although he was being treated for a back condition at the time he enlisted in the ARNG, he had indicated that he believed that he was medically qualified to perform satisfactory military service. He requested discharge from the ARNG two years later but his request did not indicate that he believed himself to be physically unfit for duty.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001059337C070421
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. On 11 May 2000, the PEB...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080018984
As a result of a decision of this Board on 25 June 1969, the applicant's record was corrected to show that on 30 October 1967, instead of being REFRAD for the convenience of the government, the applicant was retired by reason of physical disability and placed on the temporary disability retired list (TDRL) with a 60-percent disability rating. The record further shows that after the PEB determined the applicant was fit, the U.S. Army Physical Review Council modified the findings and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001062372C070421
The applicant applied to the Board to correct his records to show he was retired by reason of a physical disability. The VA Rating Decision dated 9 June 1998 shows the evidence established that the applicant’s Meniere’s syndrome was well controlled and stable on medication prior to 20 August 1993. Once a soldier is determined to be physically unfit for further military service, percentage ratings are applied to the unfitting conditions from the VASRD.