MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


      IN THE CASE OF:



      BOARD DATE:            10 DECEMBER 2002
      DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002076331

      I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of
the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-
named individual.

|     |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun                 |     |Director            |
|     |Mr. Kenneth H. Aucock               |     |Analyst             |


  The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Ms. Celia L. Adolphi                |    |Chairperson         |
|     |Mr. Ted S. Kanamine                 |    |Member              |
|     |Mr. Conrad V. Meyer                 |    |Member              |

      The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C.
1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  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 correction of military records as stated in
the application to the Board and as restated herein.

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military
                records
      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
                  advisory opinion, if any)
APPLICANT REQUESTS:  An increase in his physical disability retirement
rating percentage.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was retired from the Army in 1981 with a
diagnosis of syringomyelia.  He was later diagnosed with Charcot Marie
Tooth disease, the symptoms of which are closely related.  His condition
has progressively worsened over the years, to the point that many tasks are
extremely difficult or impossible to do.  The sensation in his hands are
such that simple tasks such as buttoning shirts, grasping, and other fine
motor skills are nearly impossible [to do].  His feet and legs are such
that walking and driving are difficult.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

The applicant served in the Army National Guard from 1974 to 1981.  He was
discharged from the Army National Guard on 30 March 1981.  On 29 April 1981
he enlisted in the Regular Army for three years, completed basic training,
and in July 1981 was assigned to Fort Sam Houston, Texas, for advanced
training.

A 27 August 1981 medical board narrative summary shows that the applicant
noted numbness involving both hands during basic training.  The condition
persisted and later involved numbness and tingling of both feet.  He began
to note extreme difficulty with tasks requiring even small degrees of
manual dexterity, and in addition thought that he had become extremely
clumsy with frequent stumbling.  Since he did not have any progression in
symptoms, he did not seek medical assistance; however, he was referred to
the internal medicine clinic when he could not appreciate the digital
checking of the radial pulse, a requirement of the 91B course.  Studies
were obtained and felt to be compatible with sensory motor peripheral
neuropathy.

The applicant was referred to the neurology clinic for further testing.
Diagnostic work-up was initiated.  A CT scan of the cervical cord showed a
central cavity that was filled with a contrast material.  The cavity was
irregular in shape and in some sections was located anteriorly close to the
posterior surface of the spinal cord.  The finding was felt to be
compatible with syringomyelia.  The anatomy and clinical significance of
syringomyelia was discussed with the applicant along with the fact that no
effective treatment was available.  It was noted that the diagnosis made
him unfit for retention in the Army.  The neurological deficits would limit
his efficacy in performing his duties.  The applicant’s condition also
revealed a prolapse of the anterior leaflet of the mitral valve, premature
atrial contractions, felt to be clinically insignificant, and slightly
elevated hemoglobin and hematocrit.  The applicant was diagnosed with
syringomyelia, cervical cord, evaluated, stable; mitral valve prolapse
syndrome, hemodynamically insignificant, stable; and atrial premature
contractions, evaluated, clinically insignificantly.  The examining
physician stated that the applicant was unfit for retention and recommended
that he be referred to a Physical Evaluation      Board (PEB).

A 29 July 1981 report of medical examination shows that the applicant was
medically disqualified for retention in the Army with a physical profile
serial         of 4 4 4 1 1 1.

On 1 October 1981 a PEB determined that the applicant was unfit because of
the abnormal condition of his cervical spinal cord with resultant sensory
changes in his extremities.  The PEB indicated that his condition –
syringomyelia, manifested by numbness of extremities, minimum rating [VA
Code 8024], was a slowly progressive disease; however, he was stable at
that time.  The PEB found the applicant physically unfit and recommended
that he be permanently retired from the Army with a 30 percent disability
rating.  The applicant concurred.  The findings and recommendations were
approved on 8 October 1981.  The applicant was retired on 2 November 1981
and placed on the permanent disability retired list on 3 November 1981.

A 11 March 1983 VA clinical record shows that the applicant was diagnosed
with syringomyelia, slowly progressive.

A 3 March 1992 office note indicates that a physician diagnosed the
applicant’s condition as Charcot Marie Tooth Disease [progressive
neuropathic (peroneal) muscular atrophy].  The doctor indicated that the
applicant stated that he had difficulty with coordination, and paresthesia
(an abnormal sensation, as burning, prickling, etc.) in his hands and feet.
 He complained of being clumsy, and could not tandem gait easily.  He
stated that his coordination was not quite as good as it used to be and his
paresthesia comes and goes.  The doctor stated that the applicant had
excellent proximal and distal muscle strength, but did have a lot of
difficulty with squatting and getting back up.  He could not do tandem
gait; however, his gait was otherwise normal.  He had slightly decreased
sensation of his feet.  He stated that he did need more information from
the VA hospital.  The doctor stated that he doubted that the applicant had
syringomyelia or multiple sclerosis.

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, grade, rank, or rating.  It
provides for medical evaluation boards, which are convened to document a
soldier’s medical status and duty limitations insofar as duty is affected
by the soldier’s status.  A decision is made as to the soldier’s medical
qualifications for retention based on the criteria in AR 40-501, chapter 3.
 If the MEB determines the soldier does not meet retention standards, the
board will recommend referral of the soldier to a PEB.
Physical evaluation boards are established to evaluate all cases of
physical disability equitability for the soldier and the Army.  It is a
fact finding board to investigate the nature, cause, degree of severity,
and probable permanency of the disability of soldiers who are referred to
the board; to evaluate the physical condition of the soldier against the
physical requirements of the soldier’s particular office, grade, rank or
rating; to provide a full and fair hearing for the soldier; and to make
findings and recommendation to establish eligibility of a soldier to be
separated or retired because of physical disability.

Congress established the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) as the
standard under which percentage rating decisions are to be made for
disabled military personnel.  Percentage ratings in the VASRD represent the
average loss in earning capacity resulting from diseases and injuries.  The
ratings also represent the residual effects of these health impairments on
civilian occupations.  Minimum rating for syringomyelia, VA Code 8024, is
30 percent.

Title 10, United States Code, section 1201, provides for the physical
disability retirement of a member who has at least 20 years of service or a
disability rated at least 30 percent.

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 contention that his physical condition has worsened may
be so; nonetheless, there is no evidence, and he has not provided any, to
show that his diagnosis of syringomyelia in 1981 was incorrect, or that his
disability rating of 30 percent at that time was erroneous.  The PEB
determined that he had syringomyelia.  He concurred with that diagnosis and
the 30 percent rating given. Two years later, the VA also diagnosed with
applicant with syringomyelia.  Both the Army and the VA indicated that his
condition was a slowly progressive disease.  However, at that time, his
disability was properly rated in accordance with the VA Schedule for Rating
Disabilities.

2.  There is no evidence to indicate that the applicant has been awarded a
rating by the VA.  Nonetheless, operating under its own policies and
regulations, the VA awards ratings because a medical condition is related
to service, i.e., service-connected.  Furthermore, the VA can evaluate a
veteran throughout his lifetime, adjusting the percentage of disability
based upon that agency's examinations and findings.  The Army must find
unfitness for duty at the time of separation before a member may be
medically retired or separated.  The Army’s rating is based on the member’s
condition at time that he is retired or separated.

3.  The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing
argument in support of his request.

4.  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.

5.  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

__CLA __  __TSK __  __CVM __  DENY APPLICATION



                                       Carl W. S. Chun
                             Director, Army Board for Correction
                               of Military Records



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR2002076331                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                       |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                               |
|DATE BOARDED            |20021210                               |
|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.       |145.00                                 |
|2.                      |                                       |
|3.                      |                                       |
|4.                      |                                       |
|5.                      |                                       |
|6.                      |                                       |