RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            15 APRIL 2004                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2003094804

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

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. Kenneth H. Aucock		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	MR. John N. Slone		Chairperson	
	Mr. John P. Infante		Member	
	Ms. Regan K. Smith		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:  

1.  In effect, the applicant requests that his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be corrected to show that he was not discharged because of a physical disability.

2.  In separate correspondence, dated 2 May 2003, to a member of this agency, the applicant stated that he had blisters on his feet when in was at Fort Benning, Georgia, because of the heat and the extensive running, marching and jumping that he did.  Because of his skin condition, he went before a medical board, and received a medical discharge, which was wrong and discriminatory.  He is a citizen of the United States and he has the right to serve his country.  He requests that the error be corrected.  He has completed documents with an Air Force Reserve recruiter and if his records are not corrected, he will not be able to enlist in the Air Force Reserve. 

3.  The applicant provides the documents depicted herein.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 

1.  The applicant enlisted in the Army for three years on 14 May 1998.  A report of medical examination completed prior to his enlistment shows that he was medically qualified for enlistment.  It did show that he had pes planus, asymptomatic.  In the report of medical history that he furnished for the examination, he denied any medical problems, past or present.     

2.  The applicant was assigned to Fort Benning, Georgia for training.  On 29 May 1998 the applicant was seen because of foot pain and dry cracking skin and blisters.  On 17 June 1998 the applicant was treated because of blisters to his feet.

3.  On 24 June 1998 while assigned to Fort Benning, Georgia, the applicant was seen at Martin Army Community Hospital for problems with blisters on his feet.  He was referred to a dermatologist.  The 16 July 1998 medical record of that referral shows that the applicant had a history of blistering of feet and hands since age 7, and that his mother had a similar condition.  He had recent outbreaks while in basic training and since then on his feet, extending to both pressure and non- pressure points of his feet and involving his hands and web space.  His condition was diagnosed as EB (epidermolysis bullosa) simplex with an indication that he would be medically discharged because of his EPTS (existed prior to service) condition.

4.  On 11 August 1998 the applicant received a permanent physical profile of      3 1 1 1 1 1.  He could do no running, jumping, or marching and no mandatory    strenuous physical activity.

5.  An 11 August 1998 report of medical examination shows that the applicant had a physical profile of 3 1 1 1 1 1, and that he was not qualified for military service because of EB bullosa simplex (recurring blisters of the skin with intense physical activity).  In the report of medical history that he furnished for the examination he stated that he was in good health, but indicated that he did have problems with his feet.

6.  In a 3 September 1998 memorandum for a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) the applicant's commanding officer stated that the applicant performed all his tasks that he was capable of performing satisfactorily; however, he did not participate in regular training due to an extended profile.  He stated that the applicant's physical status was questionable and he would have a difficult time functioning in the physically demanding Army environment.  He stated that it was in the best interests of the applicant and the Army that the applicant be separated from the Army because of his physical limitations.

7.  A 17 September 1998 narrative summary prepared for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) shows that the applicant's condition was diagnosed as EB simplex. The examining physician indicated that the applicant did not meet the physical standards for retention in the Army and that his condition existed prior to his service.  He recommended that he be referred to a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) for retention.  On 22 September 1998 a MEB recommended that the applicant be separated from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-40, chapter 5 (expeditious discharge) because of his medical condition.  The applicant indicated that he agreed with the board's findings and recommendation, but also indicated that he wanted to continue on active duty.  The MEB indicated that his continuance on active duty was medically inadvisable.

8.  Subsequent to the MEB proceedings, the applicant requested to the Total Army Personnel Command that if it was determined that he was unfit because of physical disability, he be continued on active duty.

9.  On 28 September 1998 a PEB determined that the applicant was physically unfit for further service.  It indicated that his congenital skin disease, present since age 7, and his restrictive physical profile precluded his completion of basic training, and that there was compelling evidence to support a finding that his current condition existed prior to service, and was not permanently aggravated  by such service.  The PEB indicated that the applicant had applied for continuance on active duty; however, recommended that the applicant be separated from the service without disability benefits.  The applicant                nonconcurred and requested a formal hearing.
10.  On 21 October 1998 a formal PEB met.  The applicant and his counsel appeared before that board.  The PEB came to the same conclusions and made the same recommendations as indicated in the 28 September 1998 informal PEB proceedings.  The applicant nonconcurred and stated that many people in the United States have been diagnosed with EB simplex, and that many people in the Army suffer from blistering and still are able to remain.  He stated that EB is not a serious disease even in the Army if properly taken care of.  He stated that he could properly take care of his feet and should be able to perform his duties without major complications.  He stated that he was a strong Soldier who could run 5 miles in 45 minutes and also pass the physical training test.  He stated, in effect, that if he was discharged based on an EPTS condition, it would be discriminatory.  

11.  On 2 November 1998 the PEB informed the applicant that it had reviewed his rebuttal but determined that no change to the original findings was warranted. The recommendations of the PEB were approved on 5 November 1998. 

12.  The PEB informed the Total Army Personnel Command that the finding that the applicant was unfit was approved, and that the case was forwarded for consideration of the applicant's request to remain on active duty as an exception to policy.  The PEB recommended that the applicant's request be denied because of his physical impairment.  On 14 December 1998 the Total Army Personnel Command disapproved the applicant's request for continuance on active duty.  On 23 December 1998 the Commander, Martin Community Hospital was informed that the applicant's request was not favorably considered, and that appropriate orders will be published or proper instructions issued based on the decision of the Army Physical Disability Agency.     

13.  The applicant was discharged on 19 January 1999 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-40, paragraph 4-24b(4).  He had 8 months and 6 days of service.

14.  A health record, dated 24 October 2000, shows that a dermatologist examined the applicant.  That record indicated that the applicant had no history as a child that he had blisters.  The dermatologist stated that there was no evidence of EB, that the applicant had mild sweating on feet and a history of "march blisters."  He stated that there was no evidence of skin disease with occupational/military implications.  He stated that mild sweating of the feet and march blisters are related and are very common and usually easily treated with appropriate socks and antiperspirant.

15.  Dorland's Illustrated Medical Dictionary defines EB simplex as a dominantly inherited, relatively benign, nonscarring form of EB (a loosened state of the epidermis, with formation of blebs and bullae either spontaneously or after trauma), most often involving the extremities, and usually presenting during the first few years of life; blistering may cease in adulthood.

16.  Army Regulation 635-40 provides for medical evaluation boards, which are convened to document a Soldier’s medical status and duty limitations insofar as duty is affected by the Soldier’s status.  A decision is made as to the Soldier’s medical qualifications for retention based on the criteria in AR 40-501, chapter 3. If the MEB determines the Soldier does not meet retention standards, the board will recommend referral of the Soldier to a PEB (Physical Evaluation Board).

17.  Physical evaluation boards are established to evaluate all cases of physical disability equitability for the Soldier and the Army.  It is a fact finding board to investigate the nature, cause, degree of severity, and probable permanency of the disability of Soldiers who are referred to the board; to evaluate the physical condition of the Soldier against the physical requirements of the Soldier’s particular office, grade, rank or rating; to provide a full and fair hearing for the Soldier; and to make findings and recommendation to establish eligibility of a Soldier to be separated or retired because of physical disability.

18.  The PEB may decide that a Soldier’s physical defect existed prior to service. If so, the board must further consider whether military service aggravated the unfitting defect.  According to accepted medical principles, certain abnormalities and residual conditions exist that, when discovered, lead to the conclusion that they must have existed or have started before the individual entered military service.  Hereditary or congenital conditions are examples of EPTS conditions.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Notwithstanding the evaluation that the applicant received some 20 months after his discharge, the applicant was determined by proper medical authority that he had a medical condition, EB simplex, that existed prior to his enlistment in the Army, and that because of this condition, he was physically unfit for military service.  In this respect, the applicant had the benefit of having his case heard before a MEB, an informal PEB, and a formal PEB.          

2.  The applicant's record is correct.  His request to amend his DD Form 214 to show that his discharge was not because of a physical disability is without merit. 

3.  The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of his request.   

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__JNS __  __JPI ___  __RKS __  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.

		_____John N. Slone_______
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003094804	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20040415	
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.	110.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.