IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 1 July 2008
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070019040
THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:
1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).
2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant requests that his records be corrected to show he was paid disability severance pay at the E-4 rate.
2. The applicant states that on 15 June 2006 the Army Grade Determination Review Board determined that the highest grade in which he served satisfactorily for the purpose of computation of disability retirement or separation was Specialist, E-4.
3. The applicant provides revised Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) proceedings; a letter, dated 10 July 2006, from the U. S. Army Physical Disability Agency (USAPDA); a letter, dated 15 June 2006, from the Army Review Boards Agency, Military Review Boards; and his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 23 June 1998.
2. The applicant apparently was reduced from Specialist, E-4 to Private First Class, E-3 on 1 February 2006.
3. On 27 April 2006, a PEB found the applicant to be unfit by reason of chronic bilateral knee pain and recommended he be separated with a 20 percent disability rating and severance pay. The original PEB proceedings are not available.
4. Orders dated 6 June 2006 discharged the applicant by reason of physical disability and indicated he was authorized disability severance pay in pay grade E-3 based on 7 years, 11 months, and 24 days of service.
5. On 15 June 2006, the Army Grade Determination Review Board determined that the highest grade in which the applicant served satisfactorily for the purpose of computation of disability retirement or separation pay was Specialist, E-4.
6. The applicants DD Form 214 shows that on 16 June 2006 he was discharged, in the rank and grade of Private First Class, E-3, by reason of physical disability after completing 7 years, 11 months, and 24 days of creditable active service.
7. On 6 July 2006, the USAPDA revised the applicants PEB proceedings to show the Army Review Boards Agency determined that his highest grade in which he satisfactorily served for the purpose of computation of disability severance pay was Specialist, E-4.
8. Title 10, U. S. Code, section 1212(a)(B), provides that any member who is separated for disability is entitled to disability severance pay computed by multiplying his years of service, but not more than 12, by twice the amount of monthly basic pay to which he would be entitled if serving (i) on active duty on the date when his name was placed on the Temporary Disability Retired List, or if his name was not carried on that list, on the date when he is separated, and (ii) in any temporary grade or rank higher in which he served satisfactorily as determined by the Secretary of the military department concerned.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. In April 2006, a PEB found the applicant to be unfit and recommended he be separated with disability severance pay. On 6 June 2006, orders were issued indicating he was authorized disability severance pay in pay grade E-3 based on 7 years, 11 months, and 24 days of service.
2. It appears the applicant had previously held the rank and grade of Specialist, E-4, and on 15 June 2006 the Army Grade Determination Review Board determined that the highest grade in which he served satisfactorily for the purpose of computation of disability separation pay was Specialist, E-4. The applicant was discharged from the Army 1 day later, on 16 June 2006.
3. The applicants DD Form 214 properly shows he separated in the rank and grade of Private First Class, E-3. However, had there been time, his separation orders should have been amended to indicate he was authorized disability severance pay in pay grade E-4 based on 7 years, 11 months, and 24 days of service.
BOARD VOTE:
__xxx___ __xxx___ __xxx___ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:
The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by amending his discharge orders, dated 6 June 2006, to show he was authorized disability severance pay in pay grade E-4 based on 7 years, 11 months, and 24 days of service and paying to him any severance pay due him as a result of this correction.
XXX
_______________________
CHAIRPERSON
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20070019040
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20070019040
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080010009
He was considered by a PEB on 2 May 1975 and determined to be physically unfit with a combined rating of 100% disabled and placed on the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) with reexamination in October 1976. The recommendation of the PEB was approved by the US Army Physical Disability Agency (USAPDA) and, on 12 October 1978, Orders D199-17, published by the US Army Military Personnel Center, Alexandria, VA, removed him from the TDRL and discharged him from the Army because of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080007116
The applicant's Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) and Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) documentation is not available with his records. The USAPDA stated the PEB correctly rated the applicant's right knee at 20% and correctly found the left knee and shoulder not unfitting. Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation) establishes the PDES and sets forth policies, responsibilities, and procedures that apply in determining whether a Soldier is unfit...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120003249
The applicant provides: * DD Form 214 * Memorandum, Subject: Grade Determination, from the USAPDA to the PEBLO * Army Grade Determination Review Board (AGDRB) decision * Memorandum, Subject: Grade Determination, from the USAPDA to the AGDRB * Applicants statement of a request for grade determination * PEBLO Grade Determination Checklist * Memorandum from the U.S. Army Reserve Command verifying NJP * Email Exchange * DA Form 199 (Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) Proceedings) CONSIDERATION OF...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080004798
Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation) 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. If the Soldier meets the following criteria, the Soldier will be removed from the TDRL, permanently retired for physical...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100021470
The applicant requests, in effect, that his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), item 4a (Grade, Rate or Rank), and 4b (Pay Grade) be corrected to show he retired in the highest grade held. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1372 (Grade on retirement of members of the Armed Forces for physical disability) states unless entitled to a higher retired grade under some other provision of law, any member of an armed force who is retired for physical disability under...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070000268
The applicant requests correction of his military records to show that he was retired due to a physical disability. The PEB found the applicant to be physically unfit and recommended a combined disability rating of thirty percent, and that he be placed on the TDRL with reexamination during October 2003. The available evidence clearly shows that the applicant was medically disabled and evaluated by a PEB.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140010831
On 28 August 2012, the USAPDA requested the Army Grade Determination Review Board (AGDRB) review the applicant's case for determination of the highest grade satisfactorily served for the purpose of computation of retirement or separation pay. On 9 October 2012, the AGDRB determined the highest grade in which the applicant served satisfactorily for the purpose of computation of disability retirement/separation pay was his grade on the date of separation. Therefore, there is sufficient...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060014556
The applicant further states that the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) provided him a disability rating of 60 percent with 30 percent of that for radiculopathy and pain in his left arm/hand. In support of his application, the applicant provides the following documents: a. DD Form 214, which shows, in pertinent part, he was placed on the TDRL, effective 2 September 2004. b. DA Form 199, dated 27 January 2006, which shows, in pertinent part, that the applicant was evaluated for the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070013719
The applicant requests correction of his Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) and Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) findings and recommendations. The available evidence clearly shows that the applicant was medically disabled and was evaluated by an MEB and PEB. However, the applicant did not mention either of these conditions in his appeal and there is no evidence showing that he suffered from these conditions at the time of his MEB.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060016620
On 28 October 2005, an informal PEB found the applicant unfit for his back pain, rated at 10 percent disabling, and recommended separation with severance pay. The available evidence clearly shows that the applicant was medically disabled and evaluated by a PEB. The applicant has not provided sufficient evidence showing that his TBI and PTSD conditions were, or should have been, found to be medically unfitting for retention in the military.