RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  6 March 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060010058 


	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.  


	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 Item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) of his separation document (DD Form 214) be corrected.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that since his separation from active duty, his medical conditions were looked at in detail, and it was determined through MRI that he has L4, L5, L6, S1 radiculopathy, which could have been determined prior to his discharge if the proper tests were given.  He also states that his vasectomy surgery caused complications that resulted in his having chronic prostatitus and epiditimitus.  He further indicates that his arthritis has spread through his joints.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health records in support of his application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant’s military records show that after having served prior in the reserve component (RC), he enlisted and entered active duty on 8 February 2001.  He was trained in awarded and served in military occupational specialty (MOS) 92Y (Unit Supply Specialist).

2.  On 6 November 2003, a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) recommended the applicant’s case be evaluated by a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) after diagnosing him with osteoarthritis of the bilateral knees, lower back, hip, and left shoulder.  On 7 November 2003, the applicant agreed with the MEB findings and recommendation.

3.  On 14 November 2003, a PEB convened at Fort Lewis, Washington, to consider the applicant's case.  The PEB evaluated the applicant's osteoarthritis bilateral knees, lower back, hip, and left shoulder with incapacitating episodes of pain, but no x-ray evidence or loss of joint motion.  It found his functional limitations in maintaining the appropriate level of stamina, caused by the physical impairments recorded rendered him medically unfit to perform the duties required of a Soldiers of his rank and primary specialty.  The PEB determined the applicant was physically unfit for further service with a 0 percent disability rating, and it recommended his separation from service by reason of disability with severance pay.  The applicant was further notified that he could be eligible for medical care through the VA since his medical condition was determined to be service connected.  No other medical conditions were considered by the MEB or PEB.

4.  On 17 November 2003, the applicant concurred with the PEB findings and waived a formal hearing of his case.  The findings of the PEB were approved on 18 November 2003.

5. On 16 December 2003 the applicant was honorably separated, by reason of physical disability with severance pay, under the provisions of paragraph 4-24b (3), Army Regulation 635-40.  The DD Form 214 he was issued confirms he completed a total of 2 years, 10 months and 9 days of active military service and held the rank of corporal.  Item 28 confirms he was separated by reason of disability with severance pay.  The applicant authenticated his separation document with his signature in item 21 (Signature of Member Being Separated).

6.  The applicant provides a copy of his VA health records which documents the medical treatment he has received from the VA since his discharge from active duty.  

7.  Army Regulation 635-40 establishes the Army Physical Disability Evaluation System 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.  

8.  Title 38, United States Code, sections 1110 and 1131, permits the VA to award compensation for a medical condition which was incurred in or aggravated by active military service.  The VA, however, is not required by law to determine medical unfitness for further military service.  The VA, in accordance with its own policies and regulations, awards compensation solely on the basis that a medical condition exists and that said medical condition reduces or impairs the social or industrial adaptability of the individual concerned.  The VA can evaluate a veteran throughout his lifetime, adjusting the percentage of disability based upon that agency's examinations and findings.  However, these changes do not call into question the application of the fitness standards and the disability ratings assigned by proper military medical authorities during the applicant’s processing through the Army Physical Disability Evaluation System (PDES). 

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s contention that Item 28 of his DD Form 214 is incorrect because he did not receive the proper medical tests to diagnose his condition prior to his separation from active duty has been carefully considered.  However, the evidence of record confirms he was properly processed through the PDES in accordance with the applicable laws and regulations.  His case was properly considered by a MEB and PEB and he concurred with the findings of both Boards.  
2.  The PEB findings and recommendations, to include the assigned disability rating, were based on a comprehensive medical evaluation of his disabling medical conditions by competent medical authorities through the PDES process. A subsequent change or worsening of those conditions would not call into question the validity of the disability ratings that were assigned during the PEB process, and there is absolutely no evidence suggesting PEB findings and recommendations were arbitrary or capricious.  Further, the existence of other service connected conditions that were not considered disabling during the PEB process does not warrant changing the disability rating assigned by the PEB, which was based solely on the disabling medical conditions evaluated.  

3.  The evidence of record also confirms the applicant is properly receiving treatment with the VA, which is the appropriate agency to render long term care and disability evaluation for service connected medical conditions.  The VA can evaluate him throughout his lifetime, adjusting the percent.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___JEA__  __SWF__  __RSV__  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.




____James N. Anderholm___
          CHAIRPERSON








______________________
          CHAIRPERSON


INDEX

CASE ID
AR20060010058
SUFFIX

RECON
NO
DATE BOARDED
2007/03/06
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
HD
DATE OF DISCHARGE
2003/12/16
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR 635-40
DISCHARGE REASON
Disability, Severance Pay
BOARD DECISION
DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
Mr. Schwartz
ISSUES         1.
144.0000
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.