Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003086857C070212
Original file (2003086857C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


         IN THE CASE OF:
        


         BOARD DATE: 29 May 2003
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2003086857

         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
Mrs. Nancy L. Amos Analyst


The following members, a quorum, were present:

Mr. Luther L. Santiful Chairperson
Mr. Lester Echols Member
Mr. Frank C. Jones 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: That his separation be changed to a medical discharge.

APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that his physical disabilities – acute bronchitis, a bad (frozen) leg, cramps in legs, dental defects, knee injuries, and hearing loss – rendered him unfit for duty.

As supporting evidence, the applicant provides his enlistment Standard Form (SF) 88 (Report of Medical Examination), dated 21 September 1961; his separation SF 88 dated 16 January 1962 (which indicates he had cramps in legs, not significant and "UCD – NS"); a DD Form 481-3 (Clinical Record Cover Sheet) showing he was treated for acute bronchitis on 20 January 1962; an undated extract from his medical records showing he had a bronchitis infection; an extract from his dental records dated 26 (March or May) 1962 showing he had several defects but was class 2; his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) for the period ending 6 August 1962; a Veterans Administration (VA) Form 3101 (Request for Information), dated 14 April 1965, on which he indicated he had been treated for a bad leg (frozen) the last two weeks of his training at Fort Knox, KY; orders dated 17 April 2000 showing he was ordered to annual training in Kaiserslautern, Germany for the period 29 April through 20 May 2000; a DD Form 689 (Individual Sick Slip) dated 2 May 2000 with related medical treatment record; and a DD Form 689 dated 8 May 2000 with related medical treatment record.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records are not available. Information contained herein was obtained from alternate sources.

The applicant was born on 9 August 1944. He initially enlisted in the Army National Guard (ARNG) on 21 September 1961. He served on active duty from 15 October 1961 until released back to the ARNG on 6 August 1962. He was transferred to the U. S. Army Reserve (USAR) Control Group (Standby) on 11 July 1964. He was discharged on 1 September 1969.

The applicant reenlisted in the ARNG on 17 December 1973. He transferred to a USAR Troop Program Unit on 29 August 1975. He transferred back to the ARNG on 3 February 1979. He was discharged on 4 February 1980.

The applicant reenlisted in the California ARNG on 31 May 1995.

The applicant was ordered to annual training, in Germany, for the period 29 April through 20 May 2000.

On 2 May 2000, the applicant was treated for a complaint of pain in both knees, radiating to both shins. He indicated to medical treatment personnel that he had been on a long flight in a cold C-130 cargo plan during which he sat for a prolonged period of time.

On 8 May 2000, the applicant sought follow-up treatment. It was noted that he worked as a cook and prolonged standing was required. Other than mild crepitation, no findings were noted. He was diagnosed with retro-patellar pain syndrome and placed on a 2-week profile of no physical training and working in a sitting position.

The applicant was discharged on 30 May 2001 upon expiration of his service obligation after completing 13 years of qualifying service.

In a 22 April 2002 response from the California ARNG Medical Plans Officer to a legislative inquiry, it was noted that the applicant was medically boarded several times in 2001. The applicant appealed several times and presented additional information each time for multiple medical conditions. His final appeal was made in December 2001 and was denied in January 2002. At that time, the Medical Plans Officer was informed the applicant had separated earlier in 2001. The Medical Plans Officer stated that, as the applicant's medical conditions were primarily disease conditions, with no conclusive proof that the military caused the conditions, a medical separation would provide no benefits to the applicant.

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. Chapter 8 outlines the rules for processing through the disability system soldiers of the Reserve components who are on active duty for a period of less than 30 days or on inactive duty training. Referral for processing does not mean an automatic entitlement to disability compensation. Once referred, a determination must be made whether the disease was the proximate result of performing duty. Proximate result establishes a casual relationship between the disability and the required military duty.

Army Regulation 40-3 (Medical, Dental, and Veterinary Care) states that class 2 dental patients have oral conditions that, if not treated, have the potential but are not expected to result in a dental emergency within 12 months.

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 applicant first served on active duty from October 1961 to August 1962. Although he had been treated for acute bronchitis, had several dental conditions that made him a class 2 patient, and may have been treated for a bad leg (there is no evidence to show exactly what this condition was) during that initial period of active service, none of those conditions rendered him ineligible to re-enter the service after a number of breaks in service. None of those conditions, or any other condition, kept him from performing his duties during varying periods of time over the next almost 40 years.

3. The available evidence shows that the only condition that led to the applicant receiving a temporary profile during his last period of active duty was pain in the knees. Other than mild crepitation, no other medical findings were noted. There is no evidence to show this pain was the proximate result of his active duty.

4. 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___ __le____ _fcj____ DENY APPLICATION



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




INDEX

CASE ID AR2002074226
SUFFIX
RECON
DATE BOARDED 20030529
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
DATE OF DISCHARGE
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY Mr. Chun
ISSUES 1. 108.00
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.


Similar Decisions

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00560

    Original file (PD2011-00560.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board concluded that the evidence of the record did not support rating using the code for pulmonary vascular disease as there were no duty limiting respiratory symptoms and no evidence of chronic or recurrent pulmonary embolism. The Board does not have the authority under DoDI 6040.44 to render fitness or rating recommendations for any conditions not considered by the DES. RECOMMENDATION : The Board recommends that the CI’s prior determination be modified as follows, effective as of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004100143C070208

    Original file (2004100143C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    By memorandum dated 16 June 2000, a Medical Duty Review Board (MDRB) on the applicant was requested. Army Regulation 635-40 governs the evaluation for physical fitness of soldiers who may be unfit to perform their military duties because of physical disability. It is noted that the applicant, for the most part, earned qualifying years for retirement after he was diagnosed with disc degeneration (degenerative disc disease) in 1997 and, on his last two NCOERs, his senior rater rated his...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058309C070421

    Original file (2001058309C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the right knee he exhibited the same degree of crepitation and lateral subluxation without pain which was present in the left knee. X-rays were taken of his left knee. Consequently, due to the two concepts involved, an individual’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 the individual for VA benefits based on an evaluation by that agency.The...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 00793

    Original file (PD2012 00793.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The physical examination demonstrated mild decrease in knee flexion bilaterally without evidence of swelling, instability or tenderness to palpation.At the C&P general examinationperformed approximately 2 months prior toseparation; the CI reported a history of bilateral knee pain subsequent to her April 2000 injury. BOARD FINDINGS : IAW DoDI 6040.44, provisions of DoD or Military Department regulations or guidelines relied upon by the PEB will not be considered by the Board to the extent...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140007195

    Original file (20140007195.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant's medical records show: a. The applicant provided a VA Form 21-4138, dated 14 April 2014, wherein she stated she incurred a heat stroke while performing her basic training duties on or about 31 May 1979 which was misdiagnosed by the treating physician at the base hospital. Heat stroke is the most serious form of heat injury and is considered a medical emergency.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002082957C070215

    Original file (2002082957C070215.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He continued to be treated for his ankle pain until his discharge for his physical disability on 12 October 2001. A 26 February 2002 radiographic report shows that the applicant had a metallic rod through most of the tibia, a healed mildly deformed distal tibial fracture, and a nonunited transverse fracture proximal fibula. The applicant's discharge with a 10 percent disability rating was proper and in accordance with the VASRD and Army regulations.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00462

    Original file (PD2011-00462.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The PEB adjudicated “seronegative lyme disease manifested by chronic fatigue and arthralgias of the shoulder, hands knees, ankles and feet” condition as unfitting, rated 20%, with application of the Veterans’ Administration Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). CI CONTENTION : “Initial rating by VA dated submitted April 14 2003 approved September 11, 2003 overall rating 30%, 20% residuals of lyme disease 10% recurrent rash with vesicles: 2005 20% Chronic Fatigue Syndrome added. ...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD-2012-00862

    Original file (PD-2012-00862.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The MEB forwarded no other conditions for Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) adjudication. TDRL RATING COMPARISON: Service TDRL Exit IPEB – Dated 20030808 VA* – All Effective Date 20031023 Entry on TDRL – 20010514 Rating Condition Code Rating Exam Condition Code TDRL Sep. Ulcerative Colitis 7323 30% 10% Ulcerative Colitis 7323 10% 20040122 .No Additional MEB/PEB Entries. RECOMMENDATION: The Board, therefore, recommends that there be no recharacterization of the CI’s disability and separation...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 00322

    Original file (PD2013 00322.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Other x220030320 Combined: 10%Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD)dated 20030619(most proximate to date of separation [DOS]) ANALYSIS SUMMARY :The Board acknowledges the CI’s information regarding the significant impairment with which his service-connected condition continues to burden him; but, must emphasize that the military Disability Evaluation System has neither the role nor the authority to compensate service members for anticipated future severity or potential complications of...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00219

    Original file (PD2011-00219.docx) Auto-classification: Approved

    I would ask that you request from the Department of Veterans Affairs all rating decisions and accompanying medical information for the degenerative disc disease in my neck and low back as well as the rating decisions for the above listed conditions.” The CI also submitted a letter along with his application to the Physical Disability Board of Review (PDBR) stating the Air Force Physical Evaluation Board had rated his conditions based on incapacitating episodes but that the VA had used the...