RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:           24 February 2004
      DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2003090621


      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             |
|     |Mr. Robert J. McGowan             |     |Analyst              |


  The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Raymond V. O'Connor, Jr.      |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Ms. Margaret V. Thompson          |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Lawrence Foster               |     |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, in effect, disability retirement.

2.  The applicant states that he had 14 years, 3 months, and 18 days of
active service, and 7 years and 23 days of inactive service in the US Army
Reserve (USAR) when he was separated.  He also had a permanent physical
profile, but was not processed for disability retirement.  The Army would
not let him continue his career to 20 years, but would not medically retire
him either.

3.  The applicant provides:

      a.  A 5 December 2002 letter to President Bush.

      b.  A copy of a 13 May 1985 letter from the US Army Reserve
Components Personnel and Administration Center.

      c.  A copy of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge
From Active Duty) ending 19 May 1983.

      d.  A copy of DA Form 3349 (Medical Condition – Physical Profile
Record), dated 10 January 1979, showing that the applicant was medically
qualified for duty subject to permanent assignment limitations related to
his lower right leg and left ankle.

      e.  A copy of SF 88 (Report of Medical Examination), dated 2 May XX,
taken for the purpose of ETS (expiration of term of service) and showing
that he was 6 feet, 1 inch tall and weighed 279 pounds.  Block 77 (Examinee
Qualified/Not Qualified For) is not completed.

      f.  A copy of his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation From Active Duty)
ending 19 May 1977.

      g.  A copy of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States
Report of Transfer or Discharge) ending 18 July 1971.

      h.  A copy of Letter Order Number D-06-1131, dated 11 June 1971,
discharging the applicant to the Ready Reserve.

      i.  A copy of his NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of
Service) ending 14 January 1971.

      j.  A copy of his NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of
Service) ending 30 September 1967.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were
summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the
Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AC87-
01122, on 24 August 1988.

2.  The applicant served on active duty from 26 July 1961 – 25 July 1963
and, through a series of reenlistments, from 2 February 1971 – 19 May 1983.
 At discharge, he had 14 years, 3 months, and 18 days of creditable active
Federal service.

3.  The applicant served in the USAR from 26 Jul 1963 – 30 September 1964.
He served in the Army National Guard (ARNG) from 1 October 1964 –
30 September 1967 and 15 March 1968 – 14 January 1971.  His total inactive
service was 8 years and 4 days.

4.  During his last period of military service (active duty from 20 May
1977 to 19 May 1983), the applicant was given a permanent physical profile
of L-3 on 10 January 1979 specifying no running, marching, standing, or
walking for more than 10 minutes or 1 mile.  The profile, however, found
him “medically qualified for duty.”

5.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 ending 19 May 1983 shows a reenlistment
code of RE-1A.  RE-1A applies to individuals who were fully qualified when
last separated and are, therefore, fully qualified for reenlistment.

6.  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 or her office, rank, grade or rating because of
disability incurred while entitled to basic pay.

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

8.  Title 10, United States Code, section 1203, provides for the physical
disability separation of a member who has less than 20 years active service
and a disability rated at less than 30 percent.

9.  Army Regulation 40-501, chapter 7, physical profiling, 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.  Numerical designators 2 and 3 indicate
that an individual has a medical condition or physical defect which
requires certain restrictions in assignment within which the individual is
physically capable of performing military duty.  The individual should
receive assignments commensurate with his or her functional capacity.
Numerical designator 4 indicates that an individual has one or more medical
conditions or physical defects of such severity that performance of
military duty must be drastically limited.  However, even assignment of
numerical designator 4 does not necessarily mean that the individual is
unfit because of physical disability.

10.  Army Regulation 635-40, Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement,
or Separation, paragraph 3-1, provides that the mere presence of an
impairment does not, of itself, justify a finding of unfitness because of
physical disability.  In each case, it is necessary to compare the nature
and degree of physical disability present with the requirements of the
duties the member reasonably may be expected to perform because of his or
her office, rank, grade or rating.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Service medical records do not indicate any medical condition incurred
while entitled to receive basic pay which was so severe as to render the
applicant medically unfit for retention on active duty.  Although the
applicant’s separation physical examination did not specifically state that
he was or was not qualified for separation, his DD Form 214 gave him an RE
code of RE-1A, fully qualified for reenlistment.

2.  The applicant’s military service was not interrupted by physical
disability.  Notwithstanding the presence, or possible presence, of various
medical conditions, there is no evidence of record, nor has the applicant
provided sufficient evidence, which would indicate that he suffered from
any medical condition of such severity that he was rendered unable to
reasonably perform the duties of his office, rank, grade or rating.

3.  The applicant was not separated from active duty by reason of
retirement because he had not served on active duty for the minimum 20
years.  The applicant could have reenlisted for 6 more years of active
duty, or enlisted in the USAR or ARNG for the requisite number of years in
order to qualify for a Regular Army or USAR retirement.  He did not choose
to do so.

4.  There is no error or injustice and no basis for granting the
applicant’s request.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__rvo___  __mvt___  __lf____  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 to amend the decision of
the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AC87-01122, dated 24 August 1988.




            Raymond V. O'Connor, Jr.
            ______________________
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR2003090621                            |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20040224                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |108.0000                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |