IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 24 February 2011
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110001781
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 her record be corrected to credit her with 20 years of active military service.
2. The applicant states she never had the opportunity to apply for continuation on active duty (COAD) prior to her disability retirement. She claims the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) Liaison Officer (PEBLO) failed to counsel her regarding her options, including COAD. She claims a statement confirming she had been counseled and declined COAD was never submitted with her PEB packet and the DA Form 5893 (Soldier's Medical Evaluation Board (MEB)/PEB Counseling Checklist) was started, but was never completed by the PEBLO. She states when she asked about COAD 14 months later, she was informed she had been counseled on the program; however, a counseling form confirming this was not produced.
3. The applicant further states that upon the return of her PEB findings in February 2010, she concurred with the findings due to her high risk pregnancy. She claims she did not have the strength physically or emotionally to appeal the findings. She claims she was not counseled on COAD or any other options by the PEBLO. She claims she accepted her 60-percent disability rating and signed the paper, never having any knowledge of the COAD option. As result, she left active duty 8 months short of 20 years, with 19 years, 3 months, and 22 days of active military service.
4. The applicant provides the following documents in support of her application:
* DA Form 5893
* DA Form 199 (PEB Proceedings)
* Army Regulation 635-40 (Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation) extract
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant's record shows a PEB determined the applicant was physically unfit for further service and recommended she be placed on the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) with a combined disability rating of 60 percent on 20 January 2010.
2. The applicant's record contains a Warrior Out-Processing Record Checklist completed in February 2010. This document shows the applicant confirmed a memorandum regarding the applicant's status had been obtained as of 9 February 2010.
3. The applicant's record is void of any record of COAD counseling by the PEBLO or a COAD declination statement from the applicant. It also contains no documents or records related to direct counseling by the PEBLO.
4. On 29 April 2010, the applicant was retired under the provisions of paragraph 4-24b, Army Regulation 635-40, by reason of temporary disability and was placed on the TDRL. The DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) she was issued at the time shows she held the rank of sergeant first class/E-7 and had completed 19 years, 3 months, and 22 days of active military service.
5. Army Regulation 635-40 establishes the Army Physical Disability Evaluation System (PDES). Chapter 6 prescribes the criteria and procedures under which Soldiers who have been determined unfit by the PDES may be COAD or in an active reserve status (COAR) as an exception to policy.
6. Paragraph 6-6 of the PDES regulation provides guidance on referral to the PDES prior to expiration of continuation period. It states Soldiers approved for a COAD of greater than six months will be referred to the PDES before expiration of the COAD. Final PDES evaluation may be waived for retirement for length of service. The Soldier must sign a waiver statement acknowledging that by foregoing final disability processing he or she is forgoing a potential disability retirement and the potential benefits related thereto (such as greater retired pay, or tax advantages, or certain benefits pertaining to employment under Federal Civil Service, depending upon the individual case circumstances). This waiver must be made a part of the Soldier's military health record.
7. Paragraph 6-7 of Army Regulation 635-40 provides guidance on qualification and processing for COAD/COAR. It states to be considered for COAD/COAR, a Soldier must meet the following criteria:
a. be determined unfit by the PDES for a disability that was not the result of intentional misconduct or willful neglect, nor incurred during a period of unauthorized absence;
b. be basically stable or have a disability that is of slow progression according to accepted by medical principles. It must not be harmful to the Soldier's health or prejudicial to the best interest of the Soldier or the Army. For example, the disability must not require undue loss of time from duty for medical treatment. It must not pose a risk to the health or safety of other Soldiers; and
c. be physically capable of performing useful duty in a military occupational specialty for which currently qualified or be potentially trainable (to include reclassification).
8. Paragraph 6-8 of Army Regulation 635-40 outlines special counseling requirements. It states Soldiers with 18 years of active service should be counseled on the COAD option by the PEBLO. When the PEBLO has a case of an active Army Soldier with 18 years but less than 20 years of active service, a declination to request a COAD or COAR, as applicable, should be in writing and attached to the MEB proceeding. If the Soldier refuses to indicate in writing his or her declination of COAD or COAR, the PEBLO will prepare and sign a statement that he or she counseled the Soldier on continuation and the Soldier declined to request continuation.
9. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 3991 (Computation of Retired Pay), provides guidance on computing retired pay. Paragraph (b) provides general rules for computing retired pay and subparagraph (1) provides guidance on the use of the most favorable pay formula. It states that if a person would otherwise be entitled to retired pay computed under more than one formula, he or she is entitled to be paid under the applicable formula that is most favorable to him or her.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant's contention that she should be credited with 20 years of active military service because she was not counseled on her option to request COAD has been carefully considered and is found to have merit. By regulation, special counseling regarding COAD is required for Soldiers with 18 years but less than 20 years of active service.
2. The evidence of record is void of any record that the PEBLO counseled the applicant on COAD or that the applicant declined the option to request COAD in writing. Absent evidence showing the applicant was properly afforded the opportunity to request COAD, it appears she was improperly denied the option to be retained until completing the 20 years of active service.
3. In view of the facts of this case, it would be appropriate to void the applicant's 29 April 2010 retirement and transfer to the TDRL, and to correct her record to show she was approved for COAD through 31 January 2011; and to show she was then retired by reason of temporary disability and placed on the TDRL on
1 February 2011. Further, she should be provided all back pay and allowances for the period 30 April 2010 through 31 January 2011, minus any retired pay received while on the TDRL.
4. The applicant should also complete her TDRL reevaluation as scheduled in order to determine her final disability rating and retirement status. In addition, upon completion of this reevaluation, her retired pay should be recalculated accordingly.
BOARD VOTE:
____X____ ___X_____ ____X____ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:
The Board determined the evidence presented is 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:
a. voiding her is 29 April 2010 retirement and placement on the TDRL;
b. showing she was approved for COAD and continued serving on active duty through 31 January 2011, the last day of the month during which she completed 20 years of active military service;
c. showing she was retired by reason of temporary disability on 31 January 2011, and placed on the TDRL on 1 February 2011, and issue a new DD Form 214 reflecting this change;
d. provide all back active duty pay and allowances due from 30 April 2010 through 31 January 2011, minus any retired pay received during that period;
e. completing her TDRL PDES reevaluation as scheduled in order to arrive at a final disability rating and retirement status as if she had been approved for COAD.
___________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) AR20110001781
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20110001781
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120010278
A Soldier who is physically unqualified for further military service has no inherent or vested right to continuation; (2) paragraph 6-3 that COAD applies to officers on the active duty list, Regular Army enlisted Soldiers, and Soldiers in the AGR requesting continuation as AGR; (3) paragraph 6-6 that final PDES evaluation may be waived for retirement for length of service. The applicant's reconsideration request that her record be corrected to show 20 years of active duty service under COAD...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140002146
n. In June 2013, a PEBLO (not Mr. Rxxxx) sent the applicant a DA Form 199, dated 21 May 2013, reflecting an informal PEB had determined that he continued to have an unfitting medical condition, but his rating was downgraded to 30% and recommended his permanent disability retirement. Counsel provides copies of the following: * applicant's Declaration * Joint DoD/VA Disability Evaluation Pilot Referral * DA Form 3947 * Annex 1 to Appendix C (Impartial Provider Review (IPR) Request) * two DA...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110009536
The applicant's DA Form 199 contains the following entries in Item 10 (If Retired Because of Disability, the Board Makes the Recommended Finding that): * Item 10A - The Soldiers retirement is not based on disability from injury or disease received in the line of duty as a direct result of armed conflict or caused by an instrumentality of war and incurring in line of duty during a period of war as defined by law * Item 10B - Evidence of record reflects the Soldier was not a member or...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20120000162
The applicant requests, in effect, correction of his records to show he retired with 20 years of qualifying service. 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 the applicant was assigned to the WTU for a period of more than two and one-half years.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060015351
The applicant's military service records contain a copy of his DD Form 214, with an effective date of 19 March 2000. The applicant and his Counsel contend, in effect, that in the interest of justice the ABCMR should reconsider its original decision and correct the applicant's military service records to show that he completed 20 years net active service The bases of the request is their contention that the applicant forfeited 20 days PTDY in exchange for creditable active duty service, he...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140004501
As such, on 7 February 2013, U.S. Army Garrison, Schofield Barracks, HI published Orders 038-0008, amended by Orders 239-0021, dated 27 August 2013, honorably releasing him from active duty effective 4 November 2013 - at the 3-year active duty mark, by reason of having completed his required service. According to the PEBLO, the applicant's disability processing continued because the applicant had service obligations. By email, dated 28 October 2014, the PEBLO certified that she counseled...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070011801
The applicant requests, in effect, that his record be corrected to show he was retired by reason of length of service with 20 years of active military service vice disability. The USAPDA Legal Advisor further states that the applicant could have requested COAD to reach 20 years of service before being separated for his disabilities; however, there is no program for active duty Soldiers that allows them to waive their disability findings and automatically receive a 20 year retirement. By...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050017688C070206
Counsel states that a TDRL informal MEB Narrative Summary concluded that the applicant had no change in either his chronic low back pain or migraines; nonetheless, an informal TDRL PEB eliminated entirely the disability rating for migraines. Counsel provides Tabs A through U: A. a DA Form 3947 (Medical Evaluation Board Proceedings) dated 4 February 2002; B. the original MEB Narrative Summary with two addendums; C. a DA Form 3349 (Physical Profile) dated 4 October 2001; D. the commander’s...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100020733
The PEB recommended the applicant receive a 0 percent (%) disability rating percentage with separation by reason of disability with severance pay. There is no evidence of record or independent evidence submitted by the applicant that shows he was suffering from this condition or that it was unfitting for further service at the time of his processing through the PDES. The rating decision shows the applicant is properly being treated and compensated for his service-connected PTSD by the VA,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060003145C070205
Chapter 6 of the disability regulation contains the policy on Continuation on Active Duty (COAD) and Continuation on Active Reserve States of Unfit Soldiers. The PEB findings and recommendations, to include the assigned disability rating, were based on a comprehensive medical evaluation of his disabling medical condition by competent medical authorities through the PDES process, and there is no evidence that would not call into question the validity of the findings and recommendations of...