Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120012239
Original file (20120012239.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:  7 February 2013

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20120012239 


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 his general discharge be changed to a medical discharge.

2.  The applicant states:

* he was diagnosed with sleep apnea on 3 March 2010
* sleep apnea was the true reason for his misconduct
* his medical records will confirm his sleep apnea

3.  The applicant provides a diagnostic polysomnography report, dated 3 March 2010.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 26 July 2007.  He completed his training and was awarded military occupational specialty 15B (aircraft powerplant repairer). 

2.  He was counseled for:

* being late for work
* failure to achieve a passing score on the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT)
* noncompliance with the Army overweight and body fat standards
* missing physical training on more than one occasion
* missing work
* missing formation on more than one occasion
* failure to report to formation
* being in the wrong uniform
* failure to follow a direct order
* being disrespectful towards a senior noncommissioned officer
* being late for extra duty 

3.  On 5 August 2009, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against him for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty.

4.  On 2 November 2009, NJP was imposed against him for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty and disobeying a lawful command.

5.  On 19 November 2009, NJP was imposed against him for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (5 specifications) and making a false official statement.

6.  On 11 January 2010, NJP was imposed against him for using disrespectful language towards a noncommissioned officer.

7.  On 24 February 2010, he underwent a mental status evaluation and was found mentally responsible. 

8.  Records show he completed a medical examination on 26 February 2010; however, this report is not available.

9.  On 9 March 2010, he was notified of his pending separation for misconduct (patterns of misconduct) under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), paragraph 14-12b.  The unit commander cited his:

* continued substandard performance
* failing to meet APFT standards
* failing to obey orders
* failing to meet the body fat standards
* continuously failing to report for duty

10.  On 10 March 2010, he consulted with counsel, acknowledged that he might encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life if a general discharge were issued, and elected not to submit a statement on his own behalf.

11.  On 9 April 2010, the separation authority approved the recommendation for discharge and directed the issuance of a general discharge.
12.  On 23 April 2010, he was discharged under honorable conditions (general) under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12b, for misconduct (patterns of misconduct).  He completed a total of 2 years, 8 months, and 28 days of creditable active service.

13.  He provided a diagnostic polysomnography report, dated 3 March 2010, from the Georgetown Sleep Center in Georgetown, TX.  The report shows he was diagnosed with mild obstructive sleep apnea consistent with the upper airway resistance syndrome: snoring and respiratory events resulted in significant sleep disruption.

14.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct.  Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense (military or civilian offense), and convictions by civil authorities.  Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this chapter.

15.  Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation) governs the evaluation for physical fitness of Soldiers who may be unfit to perform their military duties because of physical disability.  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, or rank.  It states that disability compensation is not an entitlement acquired by reason of service-incurred illness or injury; rather, it is provided to Soldiers whose service is interrupted and they can no longer continue to reasonably perform because of a physical disability incurred or aggravated in service.  When a Soldier is being processed for separation for reasons other than physical disability, continued performance of assigned duty commensurate with his or her rank or grade until the Soldier is scheduled for separation or retirement indicates that a Soldier is fit.

16.  Army Regulation 635-40 also provides an enlisted Soldier may not be referred for, or continue, physical disability processing when action has been 


started under any regulatory provision which authorizes a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.

17.  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/her office, rank, grade, or rating because of disability incurred while entitled to basic pay.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends his general discharge should be changed to a medical discharge because he was diagnosed with sleep apnea and this condition was the reason for his misconduct. 

2.  It is acknowledged he was diagnosed with mild obstructive sleep apnea on 
3 March 2010.  However, he provides no evidence to show this condition rendered him unfit to perform his military duties.  

3.  There is no evidence to show he could not perform his duties while on active duty and he was never referred for physical disability processing.  However, even if he had been referred for disability processing, his administrative separation which authorized a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions could have discontinued that process if the General Court-Martial Convening Authority had determined his medical condition was not the cause of his misconduct.  Therefore, there is insufficient evidence to show a medical discharge was warranted.  

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)                                         AR20120012239



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120012239



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060011003

    Original file (20060011003.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests that the findings of her Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) and Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) be amended to include the diagnosis of Upper Airway Resistance Syndrome (UARS) (sleep apnea). There are two types of sleep apnea, central sleep apnea (CSA) (without respiratory movements) and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) (caused by upper-airway blockage). The NHLBI website also describes continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) as an effective treatment for obstructive...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130015455

    Original file (20130015455.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    For his service-connected medical conditions, the VA proposed: * Obstructive Sleep Apnea, claimed as exercise-induced asthma, 50% * Degenerative disc disease, lumbar spine, claimed as back pain, 10% * Tinnitus, 10% * Adjustment Disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood, 10% * Right hand strain, left hand strain, cervical strain, right knee degenerative disc disease, left knee degenerative disc disease, allergic rhinitis, enteritis, GERD, and migraines, 0% each 15. (2) Tinnitus (MEB...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02062

    Original file (PD-2013-02062.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The ratings for the unfitting OSA condition and the not unfitting bilateral knee, low back pain (LBP) and right acromioclavicular (AC) joint arthritis conditions are addressed below;no additional conditions are within the DoDI 6040.44 defined purview of the Board. The orthopedic NARSUM notes the CI reported right shoulder pain for a year. Physical Disability Board of Review

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090011676

    Original file (20090011676.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Army Regulation 635-40 governs the evaluation for physical fitness of Soldiers who may be unfit to perform their military duties because of physical disability. However, the USAPDA stated that there is no evidence that the PEB would have found the applicant's sleep apnea unfitting since the only condition reported by the applicant to cause him problems performing his duties were his knees; he had no physical profile limitations due to sleep apnea; his commander did not mention any...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD 2012 01375

    Original file (PD 2012 01375.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The narrative summary (NARSUM) dictated 10 months prior to separation acknowledged the result of the sleep study and it’s finding of narcolepsy and stated “No significant obstructive sleep apneas were identified,” and noted the CI no longer used CPAP. The VA rating decision specified use of the 6847 OSA criteria for their rating, and did not specify frequency of narcolepsy events. RECOMMENDATION: The Board, therefore, recommends that there be no recharacterization of the CI’s disability...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02123

    Original file (PD-2013-02123.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No other conditions were submitted by the MEB.The Informal PEB adjudicated “Obstructive Sleep Apnea with CPAP, mild impairment” as unfitting, rated 0%. Therefore, IAW VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD)§4.97 (schedule of ratings,respiratory system)and 6847 rating criteria, the disability due to the OSA condition meets the 50% rating specified as “requires use of breathing assistance device such as continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) machine, but does not meet the next higher...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050016924C070206

    Original file (20050016924C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant notes that he previously requested that his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded and that he be medically discharged. In citing the basis for the deferral, the VA noted the applicant’s claim for disability for sleep apnea was received in February 2003 but his medical evidence during military service and since discharge was negative for the condition. Sleep apnea can cause serious problems if it isn't treated.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01360

    Original file (PD-2013-01360.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The MEB examination of the lungs and heart was normal.The permanent profile listed “obstructive lung disease.”The commander’s statement indicated that the CI’s required use of a CPAP device for his “obstructive lung disease” and his “numerous health problems” made him unfit for duty.At the VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) respiratory examination,4 months after separation, the CI reported his OSA. The CI was not diagnosed with a specific obstructive or restrictive lung disease by the PEBand...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110017650

    Original file (20110017650.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He indicates the applicant’s MEB was completed on 2 March 2010 that determined the applicant’s conditions of left shoulder and wrist pain and bilateral pes planus and plantar fasciitis did not meet regulatory medical retention standards. Counsel states the advisory opinion statements regarding the applicant’s foot conditions are neither evidence nor a correct application of the law to the facts in the record. In regard to whether the applicant had other unfitting physical conditions in...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120002724

    Original file (20120002724.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 13 August 2010, the applicant did not concur with the findings and requested a formal hearing. Since his diabetes was controlled by medication and his sleep apnea was found to be medically acceptable, there is insufficient evidence on which to add diabetes and sleep apnea as unfitting conditions. It is acknowledged the DVA has granted him a proposed 50% disability rating for obstructive sleep apnea and 20% rating for diabetes mellitus, type 2.