IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 21 August 2008
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080006637
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 disability rating be corrected from 40 to 60 percent.
2. The applicant states that, when he started going back to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) he learned that the Army had rated the wounds to his chest and right knee at zero percent.
3. The applicant provides VA rating decisions dated 4 March 1969, 3 November 2004, and 14 July 2006; a 10 June 2005 VA entitlement letter; and his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge).
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. 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 also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicants failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicants failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.
2. The applicant was wounded in action in Vietnam in February 1967 and was subsequently placed on the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) on 28 February 1968 due to paralysis of the radial nerve and mal-union fracture of the humerus. These injuries to his left arm were rated at 20 percent each.
3. On 1 July 1970 he was removed from the TDRL and transferred to the Retired List due to disability with the same rating.
4. The most recent VA evaluation rated the applicant's disabilities at 30 percent for the damage to his humerous, 20 percent for the radial nerve damage, plus
10 percent each for scars from wounds to his chest and right knee for a combined rating of 60 percent.
5. 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.
6. Army Regulation 40-501, paragraph 3-3b(1), as amended, provides that for an individual to be found unfit by reason of physical disability, he must be unable to perform the duties of his office, grade, rank, or rating.
7. Title 38, United States Code, sections 310 and 331, 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. Consequently, due to the two concepts involved, an individual's medical condition, although not considered medically unfitting for military service at the time of processing for separation, discharge or retirement, may be sufficient to qualify the individual for VA benefits based on an evaluation by that agency.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. An award of a VA rating does not establish entitlement to medical retirement or separation. The VA is not required to find unfitness for duty. Operating under its own policies and regulations, the VA awards ratings because a medical condition is related to service, i.e., service-connected. Furthermore, the VA can evaluate a veteran throughout his lifetime, adjusting the percentage of disability based upon that agency's examinations and findings. The Army must find unfitness for duty at the time of separation before a member may be medically retired or separated.
2. The VA 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. Consequently, due to the two concepts involved, the applicant's medical condition, although not considered medically unfitting for military service at the time of processing for separation, discharge or retirement, may be sufficient to qualify him for VA benefits based on an evaluation by that agency.
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.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
___X____ ___X____ ___X____ 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.
__________X___________
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) AR20080006637
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080006637
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00163
The CI was placed on Limited Duty (LIMDU) on 20050908 for the GSW to the chest and RUE. Chest Condition . In light of the evidence of impairment indicated by the numerous treatment notes for chest pain (also see the PTSD condition with chest pain as a contributor), the NMA statement, and the post-separation continued disability due to the chest condition, the CI’s chest condition should be recharacterized as a separate unfitting and ratable disability at the time of separation.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9510558C070209
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his honorable discharge be changed to a medical discharge. On 17 January 1967, he was honorably discharged after serving 1 year of active military service. The medical evidence of record indicates that the applicant was medically fit for retention at the time of his separation.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9508063C070209
The VA, however, is not required by law to determine medical unfitness for further military service. The medical evidence of record indicates that the applicant was medically fit for retention at the time of his separation. Records provided by the VA indicate that the applicant has been awarded compensation for medical conditions which that agency has determined to be related to military service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080018984
As a result of a decision of this Board on 25 June 1969, the applicant's record was corrected to show that on 30 October 1967, instead of being REFRAD for the convenience of the government, the applicant was retired by reason of physical disability and placed on the temporary disability retired list (TDRL) with a 60-percent disability rating. The record further shows that after the PEB determined the applicant was fit, the U.S. Army Physical Review Council modified the findings and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090007760
The applicant requests, in effect, that his record be corrected to show that instead of being discharged with a 20 percent disability rating on 25 October 1994 he was instead retired with a minimum of a 30 percent disability rating on that same date. An award or change in the disability rating granted by the VA would not call into question the application of the fitness standards and the disability ratings assigned by proper military medical authorities during the applicants processing...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080012532
That is why the VA can rate the applicant for having medical conditions even though those same conditions did not make him unfit to perform his military duties. The PEB found the applicant to be unfit under VASRD code 8626 due to chronic neuritis in his left leg, including wounds to the left proximal medial thigh, and recommended he be discharged with severance pay with a 20 percent disability rating. If he should ask the VA to rate him for PTSD, and if he received even just a 10 percent...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004105891C070208
Consequently, due to the two concepts involved, an individual's medical condition, although not considered medically unfitting for military service at the time of processing for separation, discharge or retirement, may be sufficient to qualify the individual for VA benefits based on an evaluation by that agency. 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110020504
The applicant provides: * DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) * Army Board for Correction Military Records (ABCMR) Record of Proceedings Docket Number AR20100022702, dated 29 March 2011 * VA Rating Decision, dated 8 September 2011 * certificate from the VA, dated 10 September 2011 CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The VA Winston-Salem Regional Office transmittal letter, dated 10 August 2010, shows his service-connected disability rating of 100 percent for paranoid-type...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100017722
In the original proceedings, the Board found that the applicant had been properly assigned a disability rating from the Army based on the unfitting conditions diagnosed at the time. The letter, dated 14 May 2009, written by a representative from The American Legion and provided by the applicant states that: a. the applicant was rated 30 percent disabled for a period of 5 years while on the temporary disability retired list (TDRL); b. the VA rated him 40 percent disabled for the same...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060009835
BOARD DATE: 10 April 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060009835 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 applicant requests, in effect, correction of his records to have his rank reinstated to specialist/pay grade E-4 and his disability rating upgraded based on his head injury and current disabilities. The TDRL examination shows that it was suggested that...