| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Kenneth H. Aucock | Senior Analyst |
| Ms. Karol A. Kennedy | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Melvin H. Meyer | Member | |
| Mr. Allen L. Raub | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: Reconsideration of her request to correct her records to reflect physical disability retirement or separation.
APPLICANT STATES: That she requests consideration be given for a lack of inquiry into the theft of her medical records. She states that she was advised that two officers would provide supporting statements to show that she should receive a medical discharge; however, she was informed to sign the papers and that prior to out processing her record would be changed to show a medical discharge. The officers did not provide the statements.
The applicant provides a six page narrative concerning the circumstances and events that led to her discharge, stating that another service member had illegally obtained her medical records and that documentation was missing from her medical records. She states that her ankles were constantly swollen, and that she had lower abdomen pain and a rash. She had other medical problems, to include muscle strain. She states that she was aware that she elected not to undergo a separation medical examination, but believed she would be receiving a medical discharge. However, she was improperly out-processed from her unit, the procedure being completed without her. She states that she disagrees with the counseling statements in her records, that her training was incomplete, and that she was unfairly treated by her supervisor.
The applicant provides documents which include her attempts to obtain her official records, correspondence from the Disabled American Veterans advising her of evidence necessary when applying to this Board, a copy of a 22 May 1998 VA rating decision, copies of her medical records, and documents relative to her discharge.
NEW EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION: Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in a memorandum prepared to reflect the Board's original consideration of her case on 8 February 1989 (AC87-02010).
In a 22 May 1998 rating decision the VA awarded the applicant a 10 percent service connected disability for residuals, left ankle injury, postoperative, and a 10 percent disability for residuals, right ankle injury, postoperative, effective 6 November 1995.
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 disability incurred while entitled to basic pay.
Army Regulation 40-501, then in effect, provides that for an individual to be found unfit by reason of physical disability, she must be unable to perform the duties of her office, grade, rank or rating. That regulation also states that performance of duty despite an impairment would be considered presumptive evidence of physical fitness.
Army Regulation 635-40, then in effect, provides that when a member is being separated by reason other than physical disability, her continued performance of duty creates a presumption of fitness which can be overcome only by clear and convincing evidence that she was unable to perform her duties or that acute grave illness or injury or other deterioration of physical condition, occurring immediately prior to or coincident with separation, rendered the member unfit.
Title 38, United States Code, sections 310 and 331, permits the VA to award compensation for disabilities which were incurred in or aggravated by active 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. The applicant's continued performance of duty raised a presumption of fitness which she has not overcome by evidence of any unfitting, acute, grave illness or injury concomitant with his separation.
2. The applicant’s contentions are the same as those that she made in her 1986 application to this Board. She has provided no evidence to support her contentions; and, there is no evidence, and the applicant has not provided any, to show that she was medically unfit at the time of her separation from the Army in 1981.
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. The award of VA compensation does not mandate disability retirement or separation from the Army. The VA, operating under its own policies and regulations, may make a determination that a medical condition warrants compensation. The VA is not required to determine fitness for duty at the time of separation. The Army must find a member physically unfit before he can be medically retired or separated.
4. The VA is not required by law to determine medical unfitness for further military service. The VA, in accordance with its own policies and regulations, awards compensation solely on the basis that a medical condition exists and that said medical condition reduces or impairs the social or industrial adaptability of the individual concerned. Consequently, due to the two concepts involved, the applicant's medical condition, although not considered medically unfitting for military service at the time of processing for separation, discharge or retirement, may be sufficient to qualify her for VA benefits based on an evaluation by that agency. Furthermore, the VA can evaluate a veteran throughout his lifetime, adjusting the percentage of disability based upon that agency's examinations and findings.
5. 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.
6. The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of his request.
7. 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 that requirement.
8. 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
__KAK __ __MHM__ __ALR __ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002069966 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020618 |
| 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. | 108.00 |
| 2. | 177 |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070015896
Counsel argues that the error was not discovered until 28 April 2006, as a result of surgery conducted on her left ankle, the same ankle injury that resulted in her separation by reason of physical disability from the Army. Army Regulation 635-40 establishes the Army physical disability evaluation system and sets forth policies, responsibilities, and procedures that apply in determining whether a Soldier is unfit because of physical disability to reasonably perform the duties of his office,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9605689C070209
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show: The applicant entered the Army on 23 September 1981 and served on continuous active duty until his discharge in 1993. The applicant did not have any medically unfitting disability which required physical disability processing. Consequently, due to the two concepts involved, the applicant's medical condition, although not considered medically unfitting for military service at the time of processing for separation, discharge or...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9606461C070209
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show: The applicant enlisted in the Army Reserve in December 1972, served on active duty from February through November 1973, when she was honorably discharged. He stated, in effect, that there was no evidence of any medical condition which rendered the applicant medically unfit and justified physical disability processing. The medical evidence of record indicates that the applicant was medically fit for retention at the time of her separation.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090010165
The applicant requests correction of her records to show she was medically discharged instead of honorably released from active duty. Additionally, there is no evidence in the applicants records that indicate she underwent a medical evaluation board (MEBD) or a physical evaluation board (PEB). Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation) establishes the Army PDES and sets forth policies, responsibilities, and procedures that apply in determining...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080009048
Army Regulation 635-40 establishes the Army physical disability evaluation system (PDES) and sets forth policies, responsibilities, and procedures that apply in determining whether a Soldier is unfit because of physical disability to reasonably perform the duties of his office, grade, rank, or rating. The PEB is required by law to determine the physical disability rating using the Veterans Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). In the applicant's case, there is no evidence that his left...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150001518
Title 10, U.S. Code, chapter 61, provides the Secretaries of the Military Departments with authority to retire or discharge a member if they find the member unfit to perform military duties because of physical disability. The Army rates only conditions determined to be physically unfitting at the time of discharge which disqualify the Soldier from further military service. A VA service-connected disability rating does not establish entitlement to a "medical discharge" or "medical...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9610330C070209
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his military records be corrected to show that he was retired by reason of physical disability. There is no evidence of record, nor has the applicant submitted sufficient evidence which would indicate that his mental disorder was of such severity while he was serving on active duty that he should have been referred through a medical evaluation board to a physical evaluation board. The Army must find that a service member is physically unfit to reasonably perform...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100016457
The applicant requests the findings of her Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) be changed from "fit for duty" to a medical retirement with a disability. There is no evidence that her performance was hindered by any medical condition(s). The applicant contends the findings of her PEB should have been medical retirement with a disability.
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012-00623
The Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) adjudicated the chronic left ankle pain and back pain conditions as unfitting, rated 10% and 10% with likely application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) and AR 635-40. At the C&P examination, the CI reported back pain with activity. RECOMMENDATION: The Board, therefore, recommends that there be no recharacterization of the CI’s disability and separation determination, as follows: UNFITTING CONDITION Chronic Left Ankle...
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02076
SEPARATION DATE: 20050626 Post-operative X-rays images showed satisfactory healing of the involved bones and screw.At the MEB NARSUM dated 4 April 2005(3 months prior to separation)completed3 months post-operative, the CI reported that her right foot pain was unresolved; the ability to ambulate with a soft shoe and ankle brace;and that her pain was controlled with non-narcotic medication butshe hasbeen pain free for over a week.On physical examination, the examiner noted that the right foot...