Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100028439
Original file (20100028439.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  16 August 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100028439 


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 change of his reason for separation to discharge due to physical disability.

2.  The applicant states that while on active duty he was not given the opportunity to have his medical conditions evaluated by a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB).  He currently has a 40 percent (%) disability rating from the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA).

3.  The applicant provides:

* his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty)
* his Purple Heart award certificate and citation
* two statements referencing his December 2005 injuries
* 37 pages of medical documents
* a Physical Profile sheet
* two DVA rating decisions

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 applicant’s 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 applicant’s failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 17 April 2003.  He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty 11B (Infantryman).

3.  On 15 December 2005, the vehicle the applicant was riding in hit an improvised explosive device (IED).  Statements provided at the time indicated the applicant was unconscious for a brief period and he sustained an injury to his left leg.

4.  The available medical records show the applicant was treated for mid-low back pain with minor deformities at L4-5, ringing in the ears, hearing loss, chronic headaches, and tremors.  A 1 February 2006 physical profile shows a temporary L3 profile

5.  His Post-Deployment Physical Examination, dated 16 May 2006, shows complaints of and findings for minimal hearing loss in the left ear, mid-low back pain, left knee pain (tendonitis), frequent headaches, and ringing in the ears.  In response to question 18 of his undated DD Form 2697 (Report of Medical Assessment), "At the present time, do you intend to seek DVA disability," the applicant responded by indicating "maybe my hearing (loss hearing because of IED explosion)."

6.  The applicant was honorably released from active duty on 16 May 2006 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), chapter 4, by reason of completion of required active service.

7.  On 18 September 2006, the DVA granted the applicant an evaluation of 20% for low back strain, 10% for tinnitus (ringing in the ears), and 0% for headaches and left knee strain, for a combined disability rating of 30%.  The conditions of hearing loss, bilateral hand nail fungus, post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and irritable bowel syndrome were denied.  

8.  On 30 April 2008, the DVA granted the applicant a 10% evaluation for traumatic brain injury (TBI), continued his other evaluations, and deferred a second consideration for PTSD.  His was granted a combined disability rating of 40%.

9.  Title 10, U.S. 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.

10.  Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness), 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.

11.  Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation), paragraph 2-2b, provides that when a member is being separated by reason other than physical disability, his continued performance of duty creates a presumption of fitness which can be overcome only by clear and convincing evidence that he/she was unable to perform his/her duties or that acute grave illness or injury or other deterioration of physical condition, occurring immediately prior to or coincident with separation, rendered the member unfit.

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.  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.

13.  Army Regulation 15-185 (ABCMR) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR).  Paragraph 2-9 states that the ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity.  The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that while on active duty he was not given the opportunity to have his medical conditions evaluated by an MEB.  He currently has a 40% disability rating from the DVA.

2.  The physician conducting the applicant's post-deployment physical did not find any condition that was of such a severity as to warrant the applicant being referred for medical evaluation under the Army's physical disability evaluation system.

3.  The Army rates only conditions which are determined to be physically unfitting for further military service thereby compensating the individual for the loss of his or her military career.  The VA, however, may rate any service-connected impairment, thus compensating for loss of civilian employment.  Therefore, it is not unexpected that these two different systems would produce different evaluations.

4.  The applicant has not provided and the available evidence does not show that any of the applicant's medical conditions were interfering with the performance of the duties of his office, grade, rank or rating, which is a prerequisite to being found physically unfit.

5.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's 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 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)                                         AR20100028439



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100028439



5


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-01106

    Original file (PD2010-01106.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board notes that the reflex and motor exam were normal on the MEB evaluation and that sensation was altered only for the right hand. The CI reported back pain following neck surgery. There was no additional VA conditions, but the Board notes that the VA determined the hearing loss, heart condition, TBI and sleep conditions to not be service-connected and that the heartburn was rated at 0% disability.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-01122

    Original file (PD-2014-01122.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to review of medical records and all available evidence for application of theVASRD standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. The thoracolumbar spine exam showed moderate spasm and flattening of the lower lumbar spine. From 1 to 10 (10 being the worst pain) the pain level is at 6.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080009020

    Original file (20080009020.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, correction of his 24 February 2005 Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) to show he was medically disabled instead of fit for duty, assign a disability rating, and recommend that he be placed on the permanent disability retired list (PDRL). Army Regulation (AR) 635-40, governs the evaluation for physical fitness of Soldiers who may be unfit to perform their military duties because of a physical disability. Soldiers on active duty and RC Soldiers not on active...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130008237

    Original file (20130008237.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    In an email, dated 17 June 2013, he further states: * he sent a box of VA medical records and a compact disc (CD) with medical records on it * he has over 20 injuries and has taken over 150 medications * all of these injuries/medications were for military injuries * the VA is going to increase his disability compensation to 100% because of his military injuries * he wants the Board to retire him right now 4. There is no evidence of record and the applicant did not provide any evidence that...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012-00172

    Original file (PD2012-00172.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The PEB adjudicated the chronic low back pain condition as unfitting, rated 10%, with application of the US Army Physical Disability Agency (USAPDA) pain policy. 5292 Spine, limitation of motion of, lumbar: The Board considered the PEB’s rating under the 5295 code of the 2003 VASRD.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080014123

    Original file (20080014123.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states, in effect, that he was only rated at 20 percent which is not enough to be medically retired. Title 10, United States Code, section 1203, provides for the physical disability separation of a member who has less than 20 years service and a disability rated at less than 30 percent. Consequently, due to the two concepts involved, an individual’s medical condition may not be considered to be a physical disability by the Army and yet be rated by the DVA as a disability.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01567

    Original file (PD-2013-01567.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The MEB also identified and forwarded four other conditions that were considered medically acceptable to the PEB.The Informal PEB adjudicated “discoid lupus, controlled”as unfitting, rated at 0%, with likely application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).The remaining conditions were determined to be not unfitting therefore were not rated. BOARD FINDINGS : The Board did not surmise from the record or PEB ruling in this case that any prerogatives outside the...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00296

    Original file (PD2011-00296.docx) Auto-classification: Approved

    Six other conditions, as identified in the rating chart below, were forwarded on the MEB submission as medically acceptable conditions. An Informal PEB adjudicated the low back condition as unfitting, rated 10%, with application of the US Army Physical Disability Agency (USAPDA) pain policy. Besides the increased pain and a very minor change in the ROM, there were no other significant changes in the CI’s condition from that recorded in the MEB exam.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050003452C070206

    Original file (20050003452C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Army Regulation 635-40 governs the evaluation of physical fitness of Soldiers who may be unfit to perform their military duties because of physical disability. However, at the time of his MEB his commander noted the applicant was not assigned any duties due to limitations primarily concerning his back. The DVA is not required by law to determine medical unfitness for further military service in awarding a disability rating, only that a medical condition reduces or impairs the social or...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01234

    Original file (PD2012 01234.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The PEB adjudicated the post-traumatic headache aggravated by Kevlar as severe headaches resulting in an inability to wear Kevlar; s/p depressed skull fracture, multiple scalp lacerations, near avulsion of right auricleunfitting, rated 0%, with likely application ofVeteran’s Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) andAR 635-40.The remaining conditions (hearing loss, left ear, status post ossiculoplasty Oct 1999, on H1 profile;and patellofemoral pain syndrome, intermittently...