MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:            8 August 2000     
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000039439

	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. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Ms. Deborah L. Brantley		Senior Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Stanley Kelley		Chairperson	
	Mr. James E. Anderholm		Member	
	Mr. Ronald E. Blakely		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, disability retirement.

APPLICANT STATES:  He continued to have problems with his right hip following his release from active duty and is currently receiving a 50 percent disability rating from the VA.  He notes that he also needs to have his records corrected to reflect that he was retired by reason of disability in order to receive an identification card from the military.

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

He entered active duty on 23 September 1955.  On 22 October 1957 his name was placed on the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) after a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) concluded that his right hip deformity and a urological condition, secondary to an old fracture of the pelvis sustained when he was hit by an automobile in Germany, rendered him unfit for continued duty.  The PEB noted, however, that his condition was not stabilized sufficiently to render a permanent disability determination which resulted in his name being placed on the TDRL.

In April 1959 the applicant's condition was again evaluated and it was determined that he should be retained on the TDRL and reevaluated in October 1960.  

On 30 November 1960 a PEB, convened at Womack Army Hospital, Fort Bragg, North Carolina, concluded that the applicant's condition had stabilized and recommended that his name be removed from the TDRL and that he be granted a 20 percent disability rating with entitlement to disability severance pay.  Hand written notations on documents associated with his 1960 PEB indicate the applicant never submitted a rebuttal to the findings and conclusion of the PEB.

On 31 March 1961 the applicant's name was removed from the TDRL.

An undated letter, submitted by the applicant in support of his request, indicates he was "rated 50% for service connected disabilities" by the VA.

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.

Title 10, United States Code, section 1201, provides for the physical disability retirement of a member who has at least 20 years of service or a disability rated at least 30 percent.

The Army Physical Disability Agency (USAPDA) has noted in advisory opinions in similar cases that confusion frequently arises from the fact that the Army and the DVA use different rating systems.  While both use the Veterans Administration Schedule for rating Disabilities (VASARD), not all of the general policy provisions set forth in the VASARD apply to the Army.  The Army rates only conditions determined to be physically unfitting, because they adversely effect the individual’s ability to perform assigned duties, thus compensating the individual for loss of a career.  The DVA, on the other hand, may rate any service-connected impairment, in order to compensate the individual for loss of civilian employability or social functioning.  The USAPDA has also pointed out that military disability ratings are based upon the degree to which a medical condition effects the ability to perform duty and not upon the diagnosis or name attached to the condition.  By way of comparison, the VA can and does rate an individual for pain in many instances.  The Army can only rate the same painful condition if it impairs the soldier’s ability to perform assigned tasks. 

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

1.  The rating action by the VA does not necessarily demonstrate any error or injustice in the Army rating.  The VA, operating under its own policies and regulations, assigns disability ratings as it sees fit.  Any rating action by the VA does not compel the Army to modify its rating.

2.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.

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

___sk___  ___jea__  __reb___  DENY APPLICATION

		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000039439	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20000808	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	Deny	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	108.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.