| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Wanda L. Waller | Analyst |
| Mr. Samuel A. Crumpler | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Shirley Powell | Member | |
| Mr. John T. Meixell | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, reconsideration of his request for a medical discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he does not believe the Board had all of the records of his knee injury.
NEW EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION: Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in a Memorandum of Consideration prepared to reflect the consideration of Docket Number AC93-07816 by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) on 3 August 1994. The ABCMR denied the application based on failure to timely file.
The applicant submits five service medical records. These service medical records show that he injured his left knee on 1 September 1967 while playing football, that he was evaluated and treated for this knee injury and that he was given a temporary profile for torn left medical meniscus. However, these service medical records were previously reviewed by the ABCMR on 3 August 1994.
The applicant also submits numerous medical records from his private physicians, dated 30 December 1997 to 24 January 2002. These medical records pertain to left knee pain, abdominal pain and arthritis of the left knee.
The applicant's medical records from his private physicians are new evidence which will be considered by the Board.
Chapter 7 (Physical Profiling) of Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness) provides that the basic purpose of the physical profile serial system is to provide an index to the overall functional capacity of an individual and is used to assist the unit commander and personnel officer in their determination of what duty assignments the individual is capable of performing, and if reclassification action is warranted. Four numerical designations (1-4) are used to reflect different levels of functional capacity in six factors (PULHES): P-physical capacity or stamina, U-upper extremities, L-lower extremities, H-hearing and ears, E-eyes, and S-psychiatric. Numerical designator "1" under all factors indicates that an individual is considered to possess a high level of medical fitness and, consequently, is medically fit for any military assignment.
Army Regulation 15-185 sets forth the policy and procedures for the ABCMR. It provides that, if a request for a reconsideration is received within one year of the prior consideration and the case has not been previously reconsidered, it will be resubmitted to the Board if there is evidence (including but not limited to any facts or arguments as to why relief should be granted) that was not in the record at the time of the Board’s prior consideration. The staff of the Board is authorized to determine whether or not such evidence has been submitted.
Army Regulation 15-185 also provides further guidance for reconsideration requests that are received more than 1 year after the Board’s original consideration or after the Board has already reconsidered the case. In such cases, the staff of the Board will review the request to determine if substantial relevant evidence has been submitted that shows fraud, mistake in law, mathematical miscalculation, manifest error, or if there exists substantial relevant new evidence discovered contemporaneously with or within a short time after the Board’s original decision. If the staff finds such evidence, the case will be resubmitted to the Board. If no such evidence is found, the application will be returned without action.
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 Board considered the applicant's contention that he does not believe the Board had all of the records of his knee injury.
2. The Board notes that the five service medical records provided by the applicant were contained in his service personnel records at the time the ABCMR considered his original application on 3 August 1994.
3. The new medical records provided by the applicant from his private physicians were dated 30 December 1997 to 24 January 2002. Therefore, these medical records were not considered by the ABCMR on 3 August 1994. However, these medical records do not show that the applicant had a medical condition that rendered him medically unfit for retention on active duty at the time of his separation.
4. Evidence of record shows that at the time of the applicant's separation medical examination on 13 August 1968, competent medical authority determined that the applicant was then medically qualified for separation with a physical profile of 111111. Accordingly, the applicant was separated from active duty for unfitness, not as the result of a medical condition.
5. The applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.
6. The type of discharge directed and the reasons for separation appear to be appropriate considering all of the facts of the case.
7. The overall merits of the case, including the latest submissions and arguments are insufficient as a basis for the Board to reverse its previous decision.
8. 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.
9. 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
SAC____ SP_____ JTM_____ DENY APPLICATION
Carl W. S. Chun
| CASE ID | AR2002080835 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | Yes |
| DATE BOARDED | 20030610 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 108.0000 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002082953C070215
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. The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. 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:
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001053136C070420
The applicant requests: That the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) direct the 78th Division to hold both his medical records and his “201 file”[personnel records] until the MEB [Medical Evaluation Board] matter can be resolved; that his separation orders be amended to reinstate him in his former unit in a “medical hold status” to allow the MEB process to continue until it is concluded; that he be allowed to make up any drills he has missed since his discharge so he does...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130018083
The applicant requests, in effect, reconsideration of a previous application to correct his record to show he was placed on the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) and medically retired. The applicant states, in effect, that he was medically unfit for further service at the time of his release from active duty; therefore, he should have been medically retired. Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation) establishes the Army Physical Disability...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003091662C070212
The applicant was reduced to the rank and pay grade, Private, E-1 with an effective date and date of rank of 11 December 1995. On 23 January 1998, the ADRB notified the applicant that his request for an upgrade of his discharge had been carefully reviewed and the board had determined that he had been properly and equitably discharged; accordingly, his request for a change in the character and/or reason for his discharge had been denied. The applicant made application to the Army Board for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002071310C070402
On 20 August 1979, the U.S. Army Physical Disability Agency in Washington, D.C., reviewed the decision of the informal PEB and found the applicant was unfit by reason of residuals of injury (traumatic brain syndrome) "determined not to be in the line of duty due to own misconduct." The Board also noted the applicant's service personnel and medical records do not contain any evidence of behavioral or medical conditions prior to 13 November 1978 which resulted in a diagnosis of psychiatric...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003085096C070212
APPLICANT REQUESTS :Reconsideration of the decision by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR2002071144 on 25 April 2002 not to expunge his 1 February 1992 Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) failure. The new argument presented by the applicant is that a DA Form 705 shows he "was on profile" during the 21 August 1991 Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) and, based on Field Manual 21-20, he should have been placed in a individual special program of physical...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003084281C070212
In a Standard Form (SF) 93, Report of Medical History, dated 20 August 1972, which was completed by the applicant while he was undergoing a periodic physical examination, he reported that he had been hospitalized and treated for strained back muscles in Hattiesburg, Mississippi, in 1956. Block 15 of the form has the following entry; "Activated National Guard member who related chronic left knee pain since activation. An entry appears on the SF 93, Report of Medical History, which he...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002074126C070403
The Board considered the following evidence: He provides his Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) disability claim; a VA rating action; his service medical records and some pre-service medical records; several articles on medical conditions; numerous documents that appear to be court cases concerning VA disability rating actions not pertaining to the applicant; and his Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, DD Form 214, as supporting evidence. Once a soldier is determined to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001064258C070421
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 Board considered the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120021708
She was found unfit due to sleep apnea and knee pain, but she would have like to have had a board review all her illnesses that occurred while serving as a National Guard member. Medical documents show she had twisted, sprained, or otherwise injured her left knee twice while on active duty and once after her enlistment in the GAARNG. This profile also states that she did not need a PEB.