MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:           24 JANUARY 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001060332

	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. George D. Paxson		Chairperson	
	Mr. Walter T. Morrison		Member	
	Mr. Richard T. Dunbar		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 was “declared disabled” in August 1998 by the Social Security Administration.  He maintains that his medical records should have been presented to a “Medical Evaluation Board” and that he should have been “declared disabled by the Medical Evaluation Board.”  He states that he is very sick and only receives $685.00 in social security disability.  He states that he needs “monetary relief” and submits copies of his VA medical records in support of his request.  He also submits a Tennessee Department of Human Services form indicating his physician stated that he was unable to work and a July 2001 bank statement indicating he had received a social security check in the amount of $685.00.  He also notes that his “records were handled wrong” but provides no further comments on how his records were handled wrong.

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

He enlisted in the Tennessee Army National Guard in 1983 after serving with the U.S. Air Force in either an active or reserve status since 1978.

He was assigned duties in the signal support system maintenance arena.  The front page of the applicant’s performance evaluation reports, including annual reports ending in November 1998 and November 1999, provided by the Tennessee Army National Guard, appear to indicate the applicant was a successful member of the National Guard.  The reports include comments such as, works harmoniously with others, has the will and courage to succeed, and thoughtful and caring by nature.  The last evaluation report was rendered in November 1999.

The only recent, complete evaluation report (9512-9611), indicated the applicant was a “fully capable” soldier but needed improvement in the area of physical fitness and military bearing.  His rater noted that the applicant failed the Army Physical Fitness Test in October 1996 and that he needed to work on his physical condition, but that he was within the body fat standards of Army Regulation 600-9.  His height was listed at 71 inches and his weight at 208.

He was awarded the National Defense Service Medal in 1992, the Tennessee National Guard Individual Achievement Ribbon in 1994, and the Tennessee National Guard Outstanding Unit Performance Commendation in 1998.  

Extracts from his VA medical records, which he provided in support of his request, indicate that he was evaluated for cardiomyopathy (a general diagnostic term designating primary myocardial disease, often of obscure or unknown etiology) in November 1997.  He underwent a cardiac catherization in December 1997.  There is no indication in any of the VA medical records that his heart condition was determined to be related to his military service.
In January 1998 the applicant’s physician signed a Tennessee Department of Human Services food stamp request form indicating the applicant was “unable to work due to cardiomyopathy” and that he would be unable to work for 24 months. 

On 7 April 2000 the applicant was notified that he had been recommended as “qualified for continued retention in a unit of the Army National Guard” by the Fiscal Year 2000 Qualitative Retention Board.  The letter informed him that he would be considered again by the Fiscal Year 2001 board and that he “should improve [his] physical fitness to APFT (Army Physical Fitness Test) and weight standards.”  The letter noted that the applicant had last passed an APFT in 1991. It noted that the applicant “should take particular pride in the confidence that has been evidenced by [his] selection” and was urged “to continue performing to the best of [his] ability at all times and to take every opportunity to enhance [his] military education.”

On 30 April 2000 the applicant was discharged from the Army National Guard and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group (Retired Reserve).  According to an Army National Guard retirement points history statement he had more than 21 years of creditable service for retired pay.  During his RYE (retirement year ending) date in August 1998 and 1999 he accumulated a total of 55 and 74 points respectively, including points for membership, inactive duty for training (IDT) and active duty (AD) during an annual training period.  Between August 1999 and April 2000, when he was discharged and transferred to the Retired Reserve, he accumulated 46 points.

Title 10, United States Code provides for disability processing of Reserve Component soldiers who incur or aggravate an injury or disease in the line of duty while performing inactive or active duty for training.  

Army Regulation 635-40 states that in order for soldiers of the Reserve Components to be compensated for disabilities incurred while performing duty for 30 days or less, there must be a determination by a Physical Evaluation Board that the unfitting condition was the proximate result of performing duty.

Department of Defense Instruction Number 1332.38, Subject: Physical Disability Evaluation, states that a service member shall be considered unfit when the evidence establishes that the member, due to physical disability, is unable to reasonably perform the duties of his or her office, grade, rank, or rating.

Army Regulation 635-40 also 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.  
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.  There is no evidence, and the applicant has not provided any, that his heart condition was the proximate result of performing his military duties, nor is there any evidence that he was unable to perform his duties following the January 1998 statement from his physician to the Tennessee Department of Human Services.  In fact, the Board notes that the applicant received an award, two performance evaluation reports following the January 1998 statement, and accumulated points for retired pay while performing AD and IDT.  His performance reports do not indicate the applicant was unable to perform his duties because of medical reasons.  

2.  The applicant’s discharge and transfer to the Retired Reserve was appropriate.  His continued performance of duty until his discharge and transfer supports a conclusion that the applicant was fit and that he did not have any medically unfitting disability, which required physical disability processing.  Therefore, there is no basis for physical disability retirement or separation.

3.  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 this requirement.

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

__GDP__  __WTM__  __RTD __  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001060332	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20020124	
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.