MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:           12 August 2003
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2003087238

	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. Beverly A. Young		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Ted S. Kanamine		Chairperson	
	Mr. William D. Powers		Member	
	Mr. Frank C. Jones 		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 his discharge be changed to a medical retirement discharge based on his ulcer condition that existed at the time of his discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he had repeated problems with peptic ulcer disease during his three years in the Army.  He states that he had 40 percent of his stomach removed after his military service.  He also states that the separation examination identified his previous ulcer disease; however, he did not receive a Medical Evaluation Board nor was he offered one.  In support of his application, he submitted a copy of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge); two Reports of Medical Examination; two Reports of Medical History; a Chronological Record of Medical Care and Laboratory Reports; Operative notes from the Presbyterian Hospital Center; and a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) St. Petersburg Regional Office Rating Decision.

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

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 7 July 1965 for a period of three years.  He completed the required training and served as an infantryman in Vietnam from 2 May 1966 through 9 April 1967.

On 7 May 1968, the applicant underwent a separation physical examination and was qualified for separation with a physical profile of 111111.

The applicant provided a copy of his Report of Medical Examination prepared on 7 May 1968.  Item 73 (Notes Continued) shows the entry:  "Upper G.I. Series taken on 28 JUN 1968 - #7113 revealed: The esophagus and stomach are normal.  The duodenal bulb is rather severely deformed from previous ulcer disease.  Also, marked irritability is present in the bulb, but an active crater is not seen."

On 8 July 1968, the applicant was honorably released from active duty under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 2 at the expiration of his term of service.  

The applicant's DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows his conduct and efficiency ratings were excellent throughout his service.

The applicant provided a medical report, dated 18 January 1979, from the Presbyterian Hospital Center in Albuquerque, New Mexico which shows he was diagnosed with extensive peptic ulcer disease.

On 13 February 2002, the VA awarded the applicant a 40 percent disability rating for peptic ulcer disease effective 13 February 2002.
Chapter 7 (Physical Profiling) of Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness) provides that the basic purpose of the physical profile serial system is to provide an index to the overall functional capacity of an individual and is used to assist the unit commander and personnel officer in their determination of what duty assignments the individual is capable of performing and if reclassification action is warranted.  Four numerical designations (1-4) are used to reflect different levels of functional capacity in six factors (PULHES): P-physical capacity or stamina, U-upper extremities, L-lower extremities, H-hearing and ears, E-eyes, and S-psychiatric.  Numerical designator "1" under all factors indicates that an individual is considered to possess a high level of medical fitness and, consequently, is medically fit for any military assignment.  Numerical designators "2" and "3" indicate that an individual has a medical condition or physical defect which requires certain restrictions in assignment within which the individual is physically capable of performing military duty.  The individual should receive assignments commensurate with his or her functional capacity.  

Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation), paragraph 3-2b, in effect at that time, provides that when a member is being separated by reason other than physical disability, his continued performance of duty creates a presumption of fitness which can be overcome only by clear and convincing evidence that he was unable to perform his duties or that acute grave illness or injury or other deterioration of physical condition, occurring immediately prior to or coincident with separation, rendered the member unfit.

Title 38 U.S. Code, sections 310 and 331, permits the VA to award compensation for a medical condition which was incurred in or aggravated by active military service.  The VA, however, is not required by law to determine medical unfitness for further military 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.  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.

2.  The Board considered the applicant's contention that he had repeated problems with peptic ulcer disease during his three years in the Army.  However, the evidence of record shows the applicant's medical condition did not render him medically unfit to perform his duties or justify physical disability processing.  

3.  The Board considered the applicant's contention that the separation examination identified his previous ulcer disease but he was not offered a Medical Evaluation Board.  The evidence of record shows that prior to the applicant's separation in May 1968, competent medical authority determined that he was then medically qualified for separation with a physical profile of 111111.  In addition, his DA Form 20 showed he received excellent efficiency ratings throughout his service, indicating he was never unfit to perform his military duties.  Accordingly, he was separated from active duty at his expiration of term of service.

4.  The Board noted that the applicant applied to the VA for service connected compensation and was awarded 40 percent disability rating for peptic ulcer disease.  The VA, in its discretion, may award a disability rating within the policies of that agency.  It does not, in itself, establish physical unfitness for Department of the Army purposes.

5.  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

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003087238	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20030812	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	Mr. Chun	
ISSUES         1.	108.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.