MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            24 March 1999 
	DOCKET NUMBER:    AR1998009878

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

	Mr. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Mr. Edmund P. Mercanti		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. James E. Vick		Chairperson	
	Mr. Roger W. Able		Member	
	Mr. Allen L. Raub		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That he be given a medical discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was treated on numerous occasions for a nervous condition, asthma and a left leg condition while he was on active duty.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records could not be located and are presumed to have been destroyed in the fire at the records repository in 1973.  Information contained herein was derived from the applicant’s DD Form 214 and unit records.

He was inducted on active duty on 7 October 1955, was assigned to a unit in Berlin Germany, and was promoted to pay grade E-3.

The applicant’s duty status was changed from present for duty to absent sick on four occasions.  He was admitted to a hospital for unspecified reasons on 19 April 1957 and was returned to a duty status on 24 April 1957.

Army Regulation 600-450, then in effect, in conjunction with regulations governing medical treatment of soldiers, provided that the medical treatment facility commander with the primary care responsibility will evaluate those referred to him and will, if it appears as though the member is not medically qualified to perform duty or fails to meet retention criteria, refer the member to a medical evaluation board.  Those members who do not meet medical retention standards will be referred to a physical evaluation board (PEB) for a determination of whether they are able to perform the duties of their grade and military specialty with the medically disqualifying condition.  The fact that the individual has a medically disqualifying condition does not mandate the person’s separation from the service.  Fitness for duty, within the perimeters of the individual’s grade and military specialty, is the determining factor in regards to separation.  If the PEB determines that an individual is physically unfit, it recommends the percentage of disability to be awarded which, in turn, determines whether an individual will be discharged with severance pay or retired.

Title 10, United States Code, chapter 61, provides disability retirement or discharge for a member who is physically unfit to perform the duties of his office, rank, grade or rating because of disability incurred while performing active or inactive (weekend drill) duty.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record and applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  The fact that the applicant’s duty status was changed to sick on four occasions and that he was hospitalized once for 6 days does not establish physical unfitness, the prerequisite for a medical discharge or retirement.

2.  To the contrary, he was returned to duty on every occasion, which shows his physical condition had improved and he was physically fit.  The absence of the initiation of a medical board supports this conclusion.

3.  Medical conditions which are service related but were not physically unfitting are treated and rated by the Department of Veterans Affairs, not the Army.

4.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

_JEV____  _RWA___  _ALR____  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AC98-07696/AR1998009878	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	19990324	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	108.05	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.