Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050005305C070206
Original file (20050005305C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied



                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        5 JANUARY 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050005305


      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. William Powers                |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Thomas Ray                    |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Randolph Fleming              |     |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, disability retirement or separation.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he had a profile at the time of
his separation from active duty and that he was drafted as a "1A"
indicating that he was completely healthy at the time he entered active
duty.  He states that it was not his fault that he was given a bad shot
that put him in the hospital for 30 days with hepatitis.  He states he has
taken vitamins since the day he was released from the hospital and cannot
give blood today.  He notes it is still in his system.  He states his
health record confirms it was in the line of duty.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his profile, orders releasing him from
training, a copy of his overseas movement checklist which reflects his
profile, and a copy of his separation document.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
which occurred on 26 January 1954.  The application submitted in this case
is dated
26 February 2005.

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 records are not available to the Board for
review.  A fire destroyed approximately 18 million service members’ records
at the National Personnel Records Center in 1973.  It is believed that the
applicant’s records were lost or destroyed in that fire.  However, there
were sufficient documents remaining in a reconstructed record for the Board
to conduct a fair and impartial review of this case.

4.  The applicant's separation document indicates he was inducted and
entered active duty on 24 January 1952.

5.  On 2 September 1952 the applicant was issued a temporary "3" profile as
a result of hepatitis.  The condition, which precluded various physical
activities, was determined to have been incurred in the line of duty.
According to the profile statement, the temporary profile expired on 1
December 1952.

6.  Although the temporary profile was scheduled to expire on 1 December
1952, a 16 December 1952 check list for oversea movement indicated he still
had the "3" profile at the time the check list was completed.  The check
list did, however, note the applicant was qualified for oversea movement.

7.  The applicant served overseas for approximately 12 months where he was
awarded the Korean Service Medal, among other decorations.  On 26 January
1954 he was honorably discharged in pay grade E-4.  His separation document
indicates he was promoted in July 1953.

8.  There were no medical records available to the Board and the applicant
provided no medical records.

9.  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.  The applicant’s contention that because he had a physical profile he
should have been medically retired or separated is without foundation.  The
evidence of record indicates that in spite of the profile, the applicant
was promoted and continued to perform his military duties until he was
released from active duty.

2.  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.

3.  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.

4.  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.

5.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 26 January 1954; therefore, the time
for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or
injustice expired on
25 January 1957.  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

__WP___  __TR____  __RF ___  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.




                                  _____ William Powers_______
                                            CHAIRPERSON

                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050005305                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20060105                                |
|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.                      |                                        |


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


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 03098196C070212

    Original file (03098196C070212.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. On 5 November 1952 the applicant was treated for pneumonia and was hospitalized for one week at an Army hospital in Japan. His medical records, which he submits with his request, are correct as depicted.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130004098

    Original file (20130004098.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    f. The reverse side of a DA Form 7349 (Initial Medical Review - Annual Medical Certificate), dated 7 January 2005, which shows a physician opined that he was unfit for continued service in the USAR and required a non-duty PEB to evaluate his conditions of Hepatitis C and hearing loss. He requested an informal PEB to review his medical records for a final determination of his medical fitness for retention. Since he had failed to make an election within the prescribed time limits the case...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040006886C070208

    Original file (20040006886C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    It had recurred three times since that date, the last time being in July 1950, for which he was presently hospitalized. The applicant was counseled that he could apply for relief from active duty as a commissioned officer and appointed as a Regular Army warrant officer, and subsequently be retired by reason of physical disability with advancement to the highest grade held. On 31 July 1951, the applicant was released from active duty and retired in the rank of captain by reason of physical...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090007585

    Original file (20090007585.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states, in effect, that he was erroneously enlisted on 9 February 1972 under the "Project 100,000" program because he was only 17 years and 40 days of age and because he did not meet the mental category scores required for enlistment. The applicant has provided no evidence to show that he was medically unfit or that he contracted hepatitis C while on active duty. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110020448

    Original file (20110020448.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states: a. on 23 March 2002, he was directed to appear before a medical duty review board (MDRB) after which he was issued a permanent profile rating of 4 for his lower extremities and recommended for separation; and b. his separation from the Puerto Rico Army National Guard (PRARNG) was erroneous. He submitted: a. an SF 558, dated 21 July 1986, which shows he was transported by ambulance due to trauma to his back; b. an SF 509, which shows he was admitted to the hospital on...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080017589

    Original file (20080017589.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests that his records be corrected to show that he was permanently retired for physical unfitness rated as 100-percent disabled instead of 30-percent disabled. The applicant has not submitted any evidence to show that he was not properly rated for his medical conditions in March 1977 when he was placed on the Retired List for physical unfitness. As such, there is insufficient evidence in which to correct the applicant's records to rate him for those conditions.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090000869

    Original file (20090000869.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant submitted a self-authored statement, dated 10 January 2009, and several medical documents, reports, notes, and examinations, through the DVA and/or civilian medical providers, dated on miscellaneous dates in 2008, which were not previously reviewed by the ABCMR; therefore, they are considered new evidence and as such warrant consideration by the Board. On 30 April 1999, a medical evaluation board (MEB) convened at Fort Benning, Georgia, to evaluate the applicant’s medical...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 04102179C070208

    Original file (04102179C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. 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 office, rank, grade or rating because of disability incurred while entitled to basic pay. Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 0001065

    Original file (0001065.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The fact that he was diagnosed by the DVA for Lyme disease in 1996 (some 40-plus years following his discharge) is irrelevant because his records show he was fit to perform his military duties right up until the time of his involuntary discharge. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant contends his disease has been continuously active since contraction in...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040003087C070208

    Original file (20040003087C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, that his record be corrected to show that he separated or retired from active duty by reason of physical disability. Subsequent to his original application, he also submitted copies of his service medical records and Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) treatment records. The applicant’s statement that he received disability compensation from the VA after his separation from active duty is not confirmed in records available to the Board.