Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100013763
Original file (20100013763.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  16 November 2010

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100013763 


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 reconsideration of his previous request to correct his records to show he was medically retired with an 80% disability rating.

2.  As a new argument, the applicant states, in effect, the Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) decision letter, dated 21 December 2004, shows he was approved for CRSC based on his Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) disability rating for "loss of leg, upper - 80%."  His records should be corrected to show he was retired with an 80% disability rating.

3.  The applicant provides a self-authored statement, a physical evaluation board (PEB) transcript, a PEB review memorandum, a permanent disability retirement list (PDRL) evaluation, and a CRSC decision letter.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20090001079, on 21 April 2009.

2.  In connection with his request for reconsideration, the applicant submitted a CRSC decision letter relating to his physical disability which was not previously reviewed by the ABCMR; therefore, it is considered new evidence and as such warrants consideration by the Board.

3.  The applicant’s records show he enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of  3 years on 22 November 1966.  He was honorably discharged on 20 November 1967 to accept a commission as an officer in the Army.  He was appointed in the rank/grade of second lieutenant/O-1 on 21 November 1967 and promoted to the rank/grade of first lieutenant (1LT)/O-2 on 21 November 1968.

4.  His records show he served in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) from 28 June through 29 October 1968 while assigned to 2nd Battalion, 319th Artillery, 101st Airborne Division.  On 30 August 1968, he was awarded the Purple Heart for wounds received in connection with military operations against a hostile force in the RVN on 29 August 1968.

5.  He was treated for his wounds in the RVN and in a military hospital in Japan.  On 29 October 1968, he was assigned to the Medical Holding Company, Martin Army Hospital, Fort Benning, GA.

6.  On 5 September 1969, a PEB determined he was permanently unfit for duty by reason of a 60% physical disability rating, incurred while entitled to receive basic pay.  On 23 September 1969, he was retired from active service in the rank/grade of 1LT/O-2 and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve (Retired Reserve).

7.  His records contain a DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military or Naval Record Under the Provision of Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552), dated 12 December 1985, that shows the applicant requested to be medically retired at a higher percentage of disability due to chronic osteomyelitis and other residuals of his gunshot wound.  The President, Washington PEB, Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Washington, DC, reviewed the application and recommended that his request be denied.  This documentation further shows the applicant requested that the pending application be returned to him.  Accordingly, on 
9 May 1988, the ABCMR returned the application to him without further action.

8.  On 21 April 2009, the ABCMR denied his request for correction of his records to show he was permanently retired in the rank/grade of captain/O-3 with a disability rating of 60%, along with all pay and benefits.  The Board determined his medical condition was fully considered and evaluated under the Physical Disability Evaluation System (PDES).  The evidence of record showed he appeared before a formal PEB, acknowledged he understood his rights, he was afforded the opportunity to call witnesses, and that the applicant offered testimony in his own behalf.  The evidence further shows the formal PEB found his combined disability rating was 60%, recommended that he be permanently retired from service, and that he indicated he agreed with the PEB recommendations. 
9.  The applicant provides a CRSC decision letter, U.S. Physical Disability Agency (USAPDA)/CRSC, dated 21 December 2004, wherein it states his application for CRSC was approved based on his VA disability rating of 80% for the loss of his upper leg, effective 1 June 2003, as a combat related service disability.  At the time of the letter, Soldiers were only entitled to CRSC if they had retired with at least 20 years of service.  

10.  Title 10, U.S. Code, Chapter 61, provides the Secretaries of the Military Departments with authority to retire or discharge a member if they find the member unfit to perform military duties because of physical disability.  The USAPDA, under the operational control of the Commander, U.S. Army Human Resources Command, Fort Knox, KY, is responsible for operating the PDES and executes Secretary of the Army decision-making authority as directed by Congress in Title 10, U.S. Code, Chapter 61.

11.  Title 38, U.S. Code, sections 1110 and 1131, permit the VA to award compensation for disabilities which were incurred in or aggravated by active military service.  The VA does not have authority or responsibility for determining physical fitness for military service.  The VA awards disability ratings to veterans for service-connected conditions, including those conditions detected after discharge, to compensate the individual for loss of civilian employability.

12.  The National Defense Authorization Act of 2008, Section 641, expanded CRSC eligibility effective January 1, 2008.  This eliminated the requirement for 20 years of service to qualify for CRSC.  Those members who are Temporary Early Retirement Authority and disability retirees with less than 20 years of service are now eligible for CRSC.  However, disability retirees with less than 
20 years of service are subject to reduction by the amount that the disability base pay exceeds the service base pay.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 

1.  The applicant contends his medical retirement disability rating of 60% should be changed to 80% based on a CRSC decision rating.  The decision letter stated the determination was based on his VA disability rating of 80% for the loss of his upper leg as a combat-related service disability effective 1 June 2003.

2.  A disability rating assigned by the Army is based on the level of disability at the time of the Soldier's separation and can only be accomplished through the PDES.  The evidence of record shows his physical disability evaluation was conducted in accordance with applicable law and regulations and he concurred with the PEB's recommendation.  The applicant was properly rated for his physical disabilities at the time of his medical retirement.  Therefore, he is not entitled to the requested relief.

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 to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20090001079, dated 21 April 2009.



      _______ _   _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)                                         AR20100013763



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100013763



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080018984

    Original file (20080018984.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2012 | 20120003593

    Original file (20120003593.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Army Regulation 635-40 establishes the Army PDES 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. Once a determination of physical unfitness is made, the physical evaluation board rates all disabilities using the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities. Subsequent to his retirement and over the years, the VA awarded him...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110022396

    Original file (20110022396.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The PEB determined he remained unfit, awarded him a 50% disability rating, and recommended permanent retirement. Based on a thorough review of his most recent medical evaluation, all other available medical records, current laws and Army Regulations, the USAPEB determined he remained unfit, and recommended awarding him a combined rating of 80%, and that he be permanently retired from the service. Subsequent to his discharge and over the years, the VA awarded him service-connected...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090014695

    Original file (20090014695.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The evidence of record shows that the applicant was diagnosed with "moderately severe" atrophy of upper and lower leg muscles with a 40 percent disability rating and an overall disability rating of 50 percent. The 40 percent disability rating he received is consistent with the medical evidence, the formal PEB findings, and the VASRD. Additionally, the applicant offers the fact that he was awarded a 60 percent disability percentage rating from the VA as proof that he should have received...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140019140

    Original file (20140019140.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests a 20-year Regular Army retirement with maximum medical disability (100 percent) which would qualify her for concurrent retirement and disability pay. On 17 November 2011, the applicant was released from active duty and she was placed on the TDRL on the following day with a combined disability rating of 70 percent. He stated that she had 50 days of accrued leave as of 9 November 2011 and that during her career lifetime, she had cashed in 53 days of leave, thus leaving...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120020798

    Original file (20120020798.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Army rated the disability at 20 percent and clearly indicated it was a combat-related injury on his discharge order as well as on the Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) review. f. A DA Form 199, dated 20 February 1992, that shows an informal PEB considered the applicant's case and found his condition prevented him from performing his duties and determined that he was physically unfit due to traumatic arthrosis with osteochrondritis dissecans of right ankle, injury on 6 April 1991. The...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070011889

    Original file (20070011889.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 office, grade, rank, or rating. The Army must find that a service member is physically unfit to reasonably perform their duties and assign an appropriate disability rating before they can be medically retired or separated 22. The...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090012323

    Original file (20090012323.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    It 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. By action of the ABCMR, the applicant was placed on the TDRL and temporarily retired under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-40, chapter 4-24b(2) and Title 10, U.S. Code Section 1552 for his disabilities of (1) traumatic arthritis, 20 percent disabling, (2) chronic...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090003466

    Original file (20090003466.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Therefore, absent any evidence of error or injustice in the applicant's PDES processing or evidence that shows he requested COAD (and would have been found qualified for retention) or actually performed additional active duty service subsequent to retirement, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to credit him with 20 years of active duty service for retirement purposes. However, the evidence of record confirms that the applicant was properly processed through the Army's PDES and that...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090009770

    Original file (20090009770.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The PDA concludes that if the applicant can provide current VA documentation confirming that the medical condition did not improve, the ABCMR may want to consider recognizing that the condition incurred in 1971 is still essentially unchanged and it would be an injustice not to correct his military records to reflect a 60 percent permanent military disability rating effective 2 July 1971. VA records further show that the applicant was without use of his right hand over three years after...