Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003091382C070212
Original file (2003091382C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied




RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


         IN THE CASE OF:


         BOARD DATE: 15 JANUARY 2004
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2003091382


         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:

Ms. Margaret K. Patterson Chairperson
Mr. Allen L. Raub Member
Mr. William D. Powers 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.

2. The applicant states he inquired about appearing before a MEB (Medical Evaluation Board) but was told he had signed a declination for continued service and as such, would separate on his scheduled separation date (ETS). He notes that he knew there was no guarantee that he would receive more money from the Army than from the Department of Veterans Affairs and so because his health was not good he decided to separate on his ETS date.

3. The applicant provides no evidence in support of his request.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 4 years on 4 June 1997. His enlistment physical notes that he was overweight but met the body fat standards. His physical profile, at the time of his enlistment, was 1 1 1 1 2 1, which reflected his less than perfect eyesight. He was, however, found fully qualified for enlistment.

2. He was trained as a finance specialist and served in Korea for 12 months between 1998 and 1999. He was awarded an Army Achievement Medal in recognition of his meritorious service while in Korea.

3. Following completion of his tour of duty in Korea, the applicant was assigned to Fort Carson, Colorado. He was promoted to pay grade E-4 in May 1999 and reenlisted for a period of 2 years on 2 October 2000. His reenlistment contract notes he was fully qualified for reenlistment.

4. Although the applicant’s records do not contain a copy of the document which the applicant executed to decline to reenlist, his separation document does indicate that such a statement was executed.

5. A 13 May 2002 Enlisted Record Brief indicates that the applicant had no significant physical limitation and his physical profile was recorded as 1 1 1 1 1 1 on that document.

6. On 1 October 2002, the applicant’s scheduled separation date, he was released from active duty with an honorable characterization of service. He was awarded an Army Commendation Medal at the time of his separation in recognition of his meritorious service while assigned to Fort Carson.

7. There were no medical records available to the Board and the applicant provided no medical records.
8. Army Regulation 635-40 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 solider 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 applicant is fit.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS :

1. There is no evidence, and the applicant has not provided any, which confirms that he was physically unfit to perform his duties at the time of his separation.

2. The evidence of record indicates he did not have any medically unfitting disability which required physical disability processing. Therefore, there is no basis for physical disability retirement.

3. 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 that requirement.

BOARD VOTE:

________ ________ ________ GRANT RELIEF

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__ MKP _ __ ALR __ __ WDP __ 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.





                  __Margaret K. Patterson___
                  CHAIRPERSON


INDEX

CASE ID AR2003091382
SUFFIX
RECON YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED 20040115
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.


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001064467C070421

    Original file (2001064467C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests that his records appear before a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) based on his permanent profile and that he be retired by reason of physical disability. This profile was signed by a profiling officer, an orthopedic surgeon, who did not recommend the applicant for MEB or any form of physical disability processing prior to his discharge. It states, in pertinent part, that soldiers denied or ineligible for continued active duty service may be separated upon request, due...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070008934

    Original file (20070008934.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was fully advised that if he elected to be discharged or released from active duty, as scheduled, he would not, after such discharge or release from active duty, be eligible for separation or retirement for physical disability. 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/her office, rank, grade, or rating because of a disability incurred while entitled to basic pay. The evidence...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040004894C070208

    Original file (20040004894C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Therefore, there is insufficient evidence to overcome the presumption of fitness rule in his case. Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 22 August 1981; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 21...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120001160

    Original file (20120001160.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). After this surgery, his doctor told him he would be assigned to a medical holding company pending a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) and he would be medically retired due to the condition of having a very high recurrence rate of the tumor. __________X_____________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110019513

    Original file (20110019513.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). When a Soldier is being processed for separation 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 indicates that a Soldier is fit. There is insufficient evidence to show the applicant was unable to perform his duties or he was eligible for physical disability...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080015598

    Original file (20080015598.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant did not provide any evidence which shows that any of the conditions for which the VA awarded him disability compensation affected his ability to perform his military duties. The SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that an RE code of 3 is the applicable RE code assigned for individuals involuntarily discharged at the completion of required active service. While it is clear that the applicant was retained beyond his ETS in order to receive medical care, there is no evidence...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120004326

    Original file (20120004326.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant provides: * Letter to his Member of Congress * 1981 DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) * Letter from the VA * Letter, dated 1 July 1981, Subject: Reassignment of Hospitalized Personnel * Message from Department of the Army requesting medical records * DA Form 3647 (Inpatient Treatment Record Cover Sheet) * Clinical Record – Narrative Summary (NARSUM) * Orders 95-6 (assign to Medical Hold) * Letter, dated 1 July 1981, Subject: Request for copy of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040007337C070208

    Original file (20040007337C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests that his records be corrected to show that he was retired from active duty in 1992 by reason of physical disability. A second medical document provided by the applicant indicates that on 28 April 1992 he reported to medical personnel that his physician had told him to come in when he was ready for surgery. The final medical document, provided by the applicant, indicates that on 3 September 1992 he was seen by a medical doctor who noted the applicant was being seen as...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120021716

    Original file (20120021716.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, extension on active duty for physical disability processing which may have resulted in a medical retirement. His profile dated 8 June 2011 shows no limitations with no recommendation for an MEB. As justification for his request, he stated the following: * In June 2009, he was a mental health patient for a number of months for psychological problems to include being diagnosed as bipolar * On 6 July 2009, he was hospitalized in a mental health ward after a...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 04106594C070208

    Original file (04106594C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant’s medical records are not available to the Board. 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. The Army must find a member physically unfit before he can be medically retired or separated.