IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 2 October 2008
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080011390
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, in effect, that his honorable discharge be changed to a medical retirement and that he be placed on the temporary disability retired list (TDRL).
2. The applicant states that the Army did not comply with Department of Defense directives and did not medically discharge him.
3. The applicant provides a brief, dated 10 June 2008; a letter from the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA), dated 30 May 2008; and his DVA Rating Decision, dated 8 May 2008.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 7 October 1986. At the completion of basic training and advanced individual training, he was awarded military occupational specialty 75B (personnel administration specialist). He served in Southwest Asia from 16 December 1990 to 5 May 1991. He continued to serve on active duty through a series of reenlistments and was discharged on 19 August 1994 in the rank of sergeant. He completed 7 years, 10 months, and 13 days of active military service during this period. On the following date, he was transferred to a Reserve unit. He was discharged from the U.S. Army Reserve on 20 August 1996.
2. After a break in service, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 14 September 2000. He continued to serve on active duty through a series of reenlistments.
3. He served in Kuwait/Iraq from 26 February 2003 to 13 December 2003 and in Afghanistan from 21 March 2005 to 20 March 2006.
4. The applicant was given a Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Report (NCOER) for the period ending July 2006 which shows his principal duty title as Supply Sergeant. Under Part V (Overall Performance and Potential), the rater placed an X in the Block Among the Best and listed the three positions in which the applicant could best serve as: (1) Battalion S4 NCOIC; (2) Recruiter; and (3) Distribution Platoon Sergeant. The senior rater (SR) rated the applicant Successful for his overall performance and placed an X in Block 1. The SR rated the applicant Superior and placed an X in Block 1 for his overall potential for promotion and/or service in positions of greater responsibility.
5. The applicant was discharged from active duty on 13 January 2007 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 4 by reason of expiration of enlistment or fulfillment of service obligation. He completed 6 years and
4 months of active military service during this period and 14 years, 2 months, and 13 days total active military service.
6. The applicant enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve on 14 January 2007 for a period of 6 years.
7. The applicant was given a NCOER for the period ending 13 January 2008 which shows his principal duty title as Property Book Specialist. Under Part V (Overall Performance and Potential), the rater placed an X in the Block Fully Capable and listed the three positions in which the applicant could best serve as: (1) Supply Sergeant; (2) Armorer; and (3) Property Book NCO. The senior rater (SR) rated the applicant Successful for his overall performance and placed an X in Block 3. The SR rated the applicant Superior and placed an X in Block 3 for his overall potential for promotion and/or service in positions of greater responsibility.
8. There are no medical documents available in the applicants service personnel records.
9. A DVA Rating Decision, dated 8 May 2008, shows the applicant was awarded service connection with a combined disability rating of 70 percent (effective 28 September 2007) for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), degenerative joint disease in his left knee, degenerative joint disease in his right knee, degenerative changes of the first metatarsophalageal joint, traumatic arthritis lumbar spine, right thigh injury, and pes planus (claimed as fallen arches).
10. The applicant is currently serving in the U.S. Army Reserve in the rank of sergeant.
11. Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation) governs the evaluation of physical fitness of Soldiers who may be unfit to perform their military duties because of physical disability. The unfitness is of such a degree that a Soldier is unable to perform the duties of his/her office, grade, rank or rating in such a way as to reasonably fulfill the purposes of his/her employment on active duty. In pertinent part, it states that the mere presence of an impairment does not, of itself, justify a finding of unfitness because of physical disability. In each case, it is necessary to compare the nature and degree of physical disability present with the requirements of the duties the Soldier reasonably may be expected to perform because of his or her office, grade, rank, or rating.
12. Title 38, U. S. 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.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant was released from active duty on 13 January 2007 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 4 at the completion of his required active service. He has subsequently successfully served in the
U.S. Army Reserve and there is no evidence his military career has ended due to medical unfitness.
2. The applicant contends that he should have been medically retired; however, the preponderance of evidence shows that his medical conditions did not render him medically unfit to perform his duties or justify physical disability processing. It appears neither his commander nor any other proper authority believed he was unable to perform his duties. Therefore, there is no basis for granting him a medical retirement or placing him on the TDRL.
3. It is noted that the applicant applied to the VA for service connected compensation and was awarded a combined disability rating of 70 percent for PTSD, degenerative joint disease in his left knee, degenerative joint disease in his right knee, degenerative changes of the first metatarsophalageal joint, traumatic arthritis lumbar spine, right thigh injury, and pes planus.
4. However, the rating action by the VA does not necessarily demonstrate an error or injustice on the part of the Army. 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 that 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.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________XX ____XX____ ___XX_____ 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.
_______XXXX _ _______ ___
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) AR20080011390
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080011390
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140018082
The applicant requests correction of his retirement orders to show his disability did (instead of did not) result from a combat-related injury. The applicant states: * His Line of Duty (LOD) established that his injuries occurred during deployment to Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) from 2005 to 2006 * They occurred in a combat situation and should be considered combat-related and in direct result of armed conflict/war * His retirement orders state that his injuries were not combat-related; he...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140008431
* Carpal Tunnel Syndrome, mild, right upper extremity, not medically disqualifying c. His prognosis concerning each medical issue is as follows: (1) Chronic Left Ankle Pain: Due to the chronic nature of degenerative joint disease which tends to worsen over time it is determined that this condition will persist for at least the next five years and could possible worsen with increase physical activity. On 21 July 2011, an informal PEB convened and found his conditions prevented him from...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090006557
Chapter 7 (Physical Profiling) of Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness) provides that the basic purpose of the physical profile serial system is to provide an index to the overall functional capacity of an individual and is used to assist the unit commander and personnel officer in their determination of what duty assignments the individual is capable of performing, and if reclassification action is warranted. Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080001222
Counsel requests that the applicant be allowed to appear before a formal Physical Evaluation Board (PEB). Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation) governs the evaluation of physical fitness of Soldiers who may be unfit to perform their military duties because of physical disability. The evidence of record shows he later withdrew his request for a formal hearing by a telephone conversation with his military legal counsel.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140009613
He acknowledged: * he reviewed the contents of the MEB, physical profile, and narrative summary; he understood the PEB would only consider the conditions listed on his physical profile * the physical profile included all his conditions and whether or not they meet retention standards; the conditions that did not meet retention standards were properly listed * he provided all medical documents in his possession to be included in the MEB; he agreed that the MEB accurately covered his medical...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9508405C070209
The PEB recommended that she be discharged with severance pay, rated 10 percent disabled. She was also given service connection for seven other medical conditions, all of which were rated zero percent disabling. Title 10, United States Code, section 1203, provides for the physical disability separation (discharge) of a member who has less than 20 years service and a disability rated at less than 30 percent.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120014768
On 19 March 2012, a TDRL PEB convened and found his condition continued since being placed on the TDRL. The military retiree must show the disability was incurred while engaged in combat, while performing duties simulating combat conditions, or while performing especially hazardous duties such as parachuting or scuba diving. CRSC determinations require evidence of a direct, causal relationship to the military retirees VA rated disabilities to war or the simulation of war.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100011593
The applicant requests correction of her retirement orders to show the following entries as "Yes" instead of "No": a. Her records also show she served in Kuwait from 13 January 2003 to 16 May 2003. The applicant's DA Form 199 (PEB Proceedings) contains the following entries in Item 10 (If Retired Because of Disability, the Board Makes the Recommended Finding that): * The Soldiers retirement is not based on disability from injury or disease received in the line of duty as a direct result...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090000869
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 applicants medical...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090012834
c. A 7-week post injury X-ray of the right toe revealed no evidence of healing of the fracture. Item 10 of the DA Form 199 PEB Proceedings shows the following entry: If retired because of disability, the Board makes the recommended finding that: a. "Hallux" refers to the big toe, while "rigidus" indicates that the toe is rigid and cannot move.