MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:                              
	DOCKET NUMBER:   

	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. Patrick Bogenberger		Chairperson	
	Mr. Elzey J. Arledge, Jr.		Member	
	Mr. Gary F. Geraets		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:  In effect, that his discharge from the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL), rated 10 percent disabled, be corrected to a placement on the Permanent Disability Retired List (PDRL), rated 40 percent disabled or higher.

APPLICANT STATES:  That the steroid medications he was taking were not considered by his Physical Evaluation Board (PEB), resulting in his lessor disability rating.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 6 June 1978 and was promoted to pay grade E-4.

On 10 August 1983 the applicant was determined physically unfit by a PEB due to asthma, steroid dependant complicated by allergic rhinitis, mild.  That condition was said to have existed prior to the applicant’s entrance on active duty but was considered to have been service aggravated.  The PEB recommended that he be placed on the TDRL, rated 30 percent disabled.  That recommendation was approved and the applicant was honorably discharged and placed on the TDRL.

On 27 February 1985 the applicant was given a periodic physical examination.  In that examination the applicant reported that he had voluntarily discontinued steroid use due to weight gain and could run six blocks before he experienced asthmatic problems.  The physician conducted a series of lung capacity tests on the applicant and concluded that he then suffered from only a mild airway obstruction.

A PEB was convened on 21 January 1986 which determined that the applicant was physically unfit due to asthma and recommended that he be discharged with severance pay, rated 10 percent disabled.  The applicant concurred with that finding and recommendation and waived a formal hearing.

Accordingly, he was honorably discharged from the TDRL on 14 March 1986.

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 applicant suffered from asthma prior to his entry on active duty, his asthmatic condition worsened when he was exposed to certain geographical conditions, and apparently improved when he was removed from those conditions.  Given that set of circumstances, the discharge of the applicant with a lessor percentage of disability than which he was placed on the TDRL appears appropriate.  It is noted that the applicant concurred with the PEB’s finding and recommendation and waived a formal hearing of his case.

2.  Contrary to the applicant’s contention, the physical examination which prompted the applicant’s referral to a PEB when he was on the TDRL noted his steroid use.

3.  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

_PB_____  _EJA___  _GFG___  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1998013713	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	19990210	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19980121	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	108.04	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.