Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040011083C070208
Original file (20040011083C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied



                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        13 October 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040011083


      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. W. W. Osborn, Jr.             |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Ted S. Kanamine               |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Patrick H. McGann, Jr.        |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Carol A. Kornhoff             |     |Member               |

      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, that his transfer to the Retired
Reserve be changed to Physical Disability Retirement.

2.  The applicant states that his knees were injured in a bus accident on
19 August 1990 and that he has been on a permanent physical profile since
that time.  Climbing steps or ladders, prolonged setting or walking all
cause severe pain which made performing his duties at drills a problem.

3.  The applicant provides an undated personal statement and copies of his
NGB Form 22 (National Guard Report of Separation and Record of Service), a
22 August 1990 medical record narrative entry and two memoranda to his Army
National Guard (ARNG) chain of command requesting his discharge be changed
to medical.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
which occurred on 23 May 1998, the date of his transfer to the Retired
Reserve.  The application submitted in this case is dated 10 May 2003, but
was received on 30 November 2004.

2.  Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552(b), provides that applications for
correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery
of the alleged error or injustice.  This provision of law allows the Army
Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file
within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines that it
would be in the interest of justice to do so.  In this case, the ABCMR will
conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in
the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.

3.  The applicant's military personnel records show that following an
initial tour of active duty from September 1971 to September 1973 the
applicant became a career ARNG Soldier in 1976.  He was promoted to
sergeant (E-5) on 1 July 1979.

4.  A 7 January 1993 Physical Evaluation Board found the applicant
physically fit and recommended that he be returned to duty with a physical
profile limiting his activities.  The findings and recommendation of the
Board were approved on 21 January 1993.
5.  The applicant's Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Reports (NCOERs) for
the periods ending November 1992 and 1993 note that he did not complete the
Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) due to being on profile.  The NCOER for
the period ending November 1996 noted that he failed the APFT and the one
ending November 1997 noted that he did not take the APFT and that he needed
to work to complete the APFT.

6.  On 23 May 1998, the applicant was separated from the Kentucky ARNG due
to non-selection by a selective retention board.  He was transferred to the
Retired Reserve as a sergeant (E-5).

7.  Army Regulation 635-40, paragraph 2-2b, as amended, provides that when
a member is being separated by reason other than physical disability, his
continued performance of duty creates a presumption of fitness which can be
overcome only by clear and convincing evidence that he was unable to
perform his duties or that acute grave illness or injury or other
deterioration of physical condition, occurring immediately prior to or
coincident with separation, rendered the member unfit.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  There is no available evidence to show that the applicant was unable to
perform his military duties.

2.  Even if he were on a permanent physical profile, and the record is not
clear on that point, because his last two NCOERs faulted him for failing or
not taking the APFT; he would not be eligible for disability separation
unless he was physically unable to perform his assigned duties.

3.  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

4.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 23 May 1998; therefore, the time for
the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice
expired on 22 May 2001.  The applicant did not file within the 3-year
statute of limitations and has not provided a compelling explanation or
evidence to show that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse
failure to timely file in this case.


BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__TSK __  __PHM __  __CAK__  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that 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.

2.  As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence
provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse
the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year
statute of limitations prescribed by law.  Therefore, there is insufficient
basis to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing or for
correction of the records of the individual concerned.




                                  _      Ted S. Kanamine________
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040011083                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20051013                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |142.00                                  |
|2.                      |108.04                                  |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]


Similar Decisions

  • 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 | CY2002 | 2002078826C070215

    Original file (2002078826C070215.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The height and weight entries while indicating that she exceeded the screening weight for her height, confirm that she met the Army’s weight standard by body fat measurement with “Yes” entries in both reports. The APFT entry was “Profile 9610”, which indicated that she was unable to take the APFT to a physical profile limitation; and the Height/Weight entry was “69/197 Yes”, which indicated that although she exceeded the screening table weight for her height, she did meet Army weight...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140017372

    Original file (20140017372.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no evidence in the applicant's records that indicates he was found unfit to perform his military duties due to an unfitting medical condition prior to his transfer to the Retired Reserve. Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness) provides that for an individual to be found unfit by reason of physical disability, he/she must be unable to perform the duties of his or her office, grade, rank or rating. The Army must find that a service member is physically unfit to...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 040006207C070208

    Original file (040006207C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Virginia Army National Guard (VAARNG) failed to inform him of the retirement for physical disability based on 15 years of service. The applicant was discharged from the VAARNG and as a Reserve of the Army on his ETS, 11 August 1995. The medical reports that the applicant submits with his request: a.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002067523C070402

    Original file (2002067523C070402.rtf) 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. On 4 March 1996, the ADRB denied the applicant’s request for an upgraded discharge. There is no evidence of record to show the applicant was physically unable to perform his duties.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001063197C070421

    Original file (2001063197C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Army Regulation 140-111 establishes the policies and provisions for imposing bars to reenlistment for members of the AGR program under the QMP. Since all three of those reports, however, show that she met the height and weight standards of the regulation, the absence of the required remark is considered an oversight and does not reflect the true nature of her physical fitness. Her NCOERs for the periods in question show that she had a profile and consequently could not take the APFT.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110021096

    Original file (20110021096.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation) establishes the Army PDES and sets forth policies, responsibilities, and procedures that apply in determining whether a Soldier is unfit because of physical disability to reasonably perform the duties of his or her office, grade, rank, or rating. The applicant contends his records should be corrected to show he was medically retired by reason of physical disability upon his release from active duty in...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004100686C070208

    Original file (2004100686C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    In a 27 June 2003 surgical follow-up report, the applicant's attending physician offered the opinion that the applicant's back condition had its onset with the injury recorded in 1992 and that the condition was exacerbated during the April 2001 APFT. The applicant's Noncommissioned Officers Evaluations Reports (NCOERs), for the reporting periods between December 1998 and April 2004, indicate that he successfully performed duties as a sergeant first class (SFC) and was recommended for...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120018187

    Original file (20120018187.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests: a. correction of his DA Forms 2166-7 (Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Report (NCOER)) for the period September 1994 through June 1999 to show he passed the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT); b. an explanation as to why he was not medically retired in 1994 if he was not promotable; and c. reevaluation of his promotion status. In each instance the applicant verified that his height, weight, and APFT entries were correct and that he was aware of the appeals process...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088678C070212

    Original file (2003088678C070212.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 31 March 1999, the applicant’s commander was notified that the State Medical Duty Review Board (MDRB) ordered that the applicant was not to perform military duty until he completed a fitness for duty evaluation. After the applicant’s myocardial infarction and angioplasty, his medical condition was understandably questionable, which resulted in the MDRB ordering that he not perform duties until he was given a fitness for duty evaluation. However, even if the applicant had been given a...