RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:            27 MAY 2004
      DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2003096973


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

|     |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun               |     |Director             |
|     |Ms. Deborah L. Brantley           |     |Senior Analyst       |


  The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Melvin Meyer                  |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Ms. Regan Smith                   |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Thomas O'Shaughnessy          |     |Member               |

      The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests disability retirement retroactive to 31 August
1992.

2.  The applicant states that the Army failed to properly diagnose his
Lyme’s Disease, which he contends occurred between 1987 and 1990, while on
military training.  He states that because of the illness it “drove [him]
out of the Army under the Voluntary Separation Incentive” program.

3.  The applicant states he has been suffering from Lyme’s Disease since
1987 when he was bitten by ticks while on a training exercise at Fort
Belvoir, Virginia.  He states that in 1991 he was reassigned to Germany
where the poor ventilation and heating only aggravated his condition and as
such he requested reclassification “so that [he] could remain in the
military.”  He notes his request was denied.

4.  He states only because the doctors continued to tell him he was in good
health, he reported that his health was good on a separation physical
examination conducted in 1997.

5.  He states that the disease has robbed him of his ability to think and
make rational decisions and maintains that if the disease had been
diagnosed earlier he would have received proper treatment, would have
remained on active duty, and would have been promoted to pay grade E-8.

6.  Ultimately, the applicant notes that he was released from the United
States Army Reserve for unfitness, but could not be retired because the
disease occurred while he was on active duty.  He states, in effect, that
the military doctors’ lack of knowledge on Lyme’s Disease has affected his
good health and hurt his family.

7.  The applicant provides extracts from his service medical records, a
copy of a physical profile issued by the United States Army Reserve, a copy
of his separation physical examination, documents from the Department of
Veterans Affairs, a copy of the document denying his reclassification
request, and a copy of his separation report.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Neither the applicant’s service medical record nor his Official
Military Personnel File was available to the Board.  The documents provided
by the applicant, however, were sufficient to conduct a fair and impartial
review of this case.

2.  The applicant entered active duty in April 1978 and was released from
active duty on 31 August 1992 under the Army’s Voluntary Separation
Incentive (VSI) program.  Throughout his military career, it appears he
performed duties as a special purpose equipment repairman and was promoted
to pay grade E-7 in July 1988.  At the time of his release from active duty
he was assigned to an ordnance company in Europe.  His separation document
indicates that he was entitled to an annual VSI payment of approximately
$8000.00 for 28 years.

3.  Service medical records, provided by the applicant, indicate that on 11
August 1988 he was seen by medical officials at Fort Belvoir for a sprained
ankle and also reported noting that he previously had ticks on his ankle
and now had bumps on the ankle.  The examining physician noted in his
assessment that “doubt tick bites” but told the applicant what signs to
look for regarding Lyme’s Disease.

4.  In September 1988 the applicant returned to health officials at Fort
Belvoir complaining of a rash on his groin area.

5.  In May 1990 the applicant again presented to medical officials at Fort
Belvoir with multiple complaints, including stiffness in his ankle, knee,
and shoulder.  The medical documents appear to indicate that he underwent
tests for Lyme’s Disease in September 1989, which were negative, and that
the applicant reported a history of tick bites in August 1989.  A 21 May
1990 medical notation confirmed Lyme’s Disease tests done in 1989 and notes
that “at this point in time” the applicant complains of fatigue and slight
stiffness of his joints.  The physician indicated that he could not “say
that this is or is not Lyme’s Disease” and that the question was if a trial
of antibiotics was warranted.

6.  On 30 August 1990 the applicant reported to medical officials that he
had a stiff neck and was unsure if he injured it playing basketball or
doing stretching exercises.  The medical treatment form noted that the
applicant was being treated for Lyme’s Disease.  By 4 September 1990 the
applicant reported that his range of motion in his neck had improved and
that he had much less neck pain.

7.  The applicant provided no additional evidence of medical treatment
between his August 1990 visit to medical authorities and his separation in
July 1992.

8.  The 6 December 1991 document, provided by the applicant, indicates that
a request for reclassification was denied because “no MOS [military
occupational specialty] selections are available at this time.”  The basis
for the applicant’s request for reclassification, and copies of the entire
request, were not provided by the applicant.

9.  On 8 January 1997, nearly 5 years after the applicant was released from
active duty under the VSI program, he reported that his health was good on
a physical examination conducted as part of a request to enlist in the
United States Army Reserve.  He did note that he suffered from allergies
and high blood pressure associated with Lyme’s Disease between 1986 and
1991.

10.  The examining physician indicated that the applicant should be
referred to a medical board because of severe incapacitating allergies and
arthritis.

11.  On 26 June 2003 the applicant was transferred to the retired reserve
as a result of being medically disqualified.  A physical profile, dated in
August 2003, after the applicant’s transfer to the retired reserve,
indicates the applicant was issued a permanent physical profile for
“anxiety (polyarthralgia [inflammation of several joints together] due to
Lyme’s Disease with neck, shoulder, back, multiple joint pain).”

12.  According to documents, provided by the applicant, from the Department
of Veterans Affairs, by June 2003 the applicant had been awarded a combined
70 percent disability rating retroactive to September 2002.  His ratings
included 10 percent ratings for residuals of lumbosacral strain, anxiety
disorder due to Lyme’s Disease, chronic allergic rhinosinusitis, and
chronic arthritis to various joints based on a history of Lyme’s Disease.
Although the Department of Veterans Affairs determined that the applicant’s
history of Lyme’s Disease was service connected, it was not disabling and
evaluated that condition at 0 percent.

13.  Army policy and the Department of Defense Military Pay and Allowances
Entitlements Manual (DODPM), based on Public Law 102-190, 5 December 1991,
as amended, prescribed the qualifications for entitlement to readjustment
benefits for certain voluntarily separated members.  The VSI was one of the
monetary benefits associated with that incentive program.  The voluntary
incentive program was designed to support the Army's drawdown.  HQDA
message 281802Z January 1992, clarified issues associated with the
voluntary separation incentive program via a question and answer format.
It stated, that Soldiers approved for VSI will be paid in annual
installments commencing on their departure date from Active Duty, and on
each anniversary date thereafter for twice the number of years on Active
Duty, provided the Soldier continues to serve in the Ready Reserve.  VSI
annual payments will be discontinued if the member is separated from the
Ready Reserve unless the individual becomes ineligible to continue to serve
due to medical or age limitations in which case the Soldier will be
transferred to the Standby Reserve or the Retired Reserve.

14.  Army Regulation 635-40, which outlines the policies and procedures for
disability processing 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 Soldier 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, is an indication that the Soldier is fit.

15.  Army Regulation 635-40 also states, in effect, that Reserve Component
Soldiers will be separated from the Reserve when they no longer meet
medical retention standards.  Such separation will be without benefits if
the unfitting condition results from an injury which is due to the
intentional misconduct or willful neglect of the individual, if the
disability was incurred during a period of unauthorized absence, or if the
disability was not incurred or aggravated as the proximate result of
performing annual training, active duty special work, active duty for
training, or inactive duty training.

16.  Title 38, United States Code, sections 1110 and 1131, permit the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to award compensation for disabilities
which were incurred in or aggravated by active military service.  However,
an award of a higher VA rating does not establish error or injustice in the
Army rating.  An Army disability rating is intended to compensate an
individual for interruption of a military career after it has been
determined that the individual suffers from an impairment that disqualifies
him or her from further military service.  The VA, which has neither the
authority, nor the responsibility for determining physical fitness for
military service, awards disability ratings to veterans for conditions that
it determines were incurred during military service and subsequently affect
the individual’s civilian employability.  Furthermore, unlike the Army, the
VA can evaluate a veteran throughout his or her lifetime, adjusting the
percentage of disability based upon that agency’s examinations and
findings.  The Army rates only conditions determined to be physically
unfitting at the time of discharge, thus compensating the individual for
loss of a career; while the VA may rate any service connected impairment,
including those that are detected after discharge, in order to compensate
the individual for loss of civilian employability.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The limited evidence available to the Board suggests that the
applicant, in spite of his various medical conditions, was likely
performing his duties in a satisfactory manner until his voluntary
separation from active duty in July 1992.

2.  It is noted that the medical evidence provided by the applicant
indicates that he did undergo tests for Lyme’s Disease within a month of
reporting that ticks had bitten him and that he was being treated
accordingly.  There is no medical evidence that he experienced any
debilitating medical conditions which precluded his performance of duty
between his August 1990 visit to the medical officials and his voluntary
separation from active duty in July 1992.  He has presented no evidence
that his request for reclassification or his request for separation under
the VSI program was “forced” on him because of his medical conditions.

3.  There is no evidence of record indicating the applicant had any
medically unfitting disability at the time of his separation from active
duty, which required physical disability processing.  Therefore, there is
no basis for physical disability retirement or separation.

4.  The fact that the applicant may have subsequently been determined to be
medical disqualified from continued service in the United States Army
Reserve, nearly 5 years after his separation from active duty, or his
receipt of disability compensation by the Department of Veterans Affairs,
is not evidence that the applicant should have been medically retired from
active duty in 1992.

5.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must
show, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in
error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would
satisfy the aforementioned requirement.

6.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the
applicant's request.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__MM___  __RS ___  __TO ___  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable
error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall
merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the
records of the individual concerned.





            _____Melvin Meyer________
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR2003096973                            |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20040527                                |
|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.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |