IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 25 September 2020 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20200000120 APPLICANT REQUESTS: in effect, correction of his DA Form 199 (Physical Evaluation Board Proceedings) to show his medical condition(s) were incurred in combat. APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * Orders dated August * Service medical treatment records dated April 2005 * DD Form 2796 (Post Deployment Health Assessment) dated 23 August 2005 * Service treatment medical records September 2005 * DA Form 3349 (Physical Profile) dated 30 January 2006 * DA Form 3947 (Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) Proceedings) dated 4 April 2007 * DA Form 199 (Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) Proceedings) dated 30 April 2007 * Orders dated 17 May * DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) for the period ending 21 July 2007 * Orders dated 25 June * Medical treatment records * Applicant’s letter to the Board dated 19 October 2019 FACTS: 1. The applicant did not file within the 3 year time frame provided in Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b); however, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) conducted a substantive review of this case and determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. 2. The applicant states, in effect, his DA Form 3947 shows his diagnosis of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (progressive) was medically unacceptable in accordance with Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness), paragraph 3-7m. This condition did not exist prior to his entrance onto active duty. His medical doctor who conducted the MEB stated it likely was the applicant’s deployment that aggravated his medical condition. The applicant states his temporary disability retirement Orders state within its special instructions, "Disability is based on injury or disease received in line of duty as a direct result of armed conflict or cause by instrumentality of war and incurred in the line of duty during war period defined by law: No." Additionally, his permanent disability retirement Orders, dated 25 June 8, states in its special instructions, "Disability is based on injury or disease received in line of duty as a direct result of armed conflict or cause by instrumentality of war and incurred in the line of duty during war period defined by law: Not applicable. Disability resulted from a combat related injury as defined in [Title] 26, USC [U.S. Code] [section] 104: Not applicable." He believes these statement are incorrect and should be corrected to show his medical condition was combat related and incurred during a period of war. 3. The applicant submits a separate letter to the Board informing them prior to his deployment to Iraq in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom in September 2004, he was healthy at 31 years of age. He had no medical conditions that prevented him from deploying as ordered with his military unit. Nearly 7 months into his deployment he began having problems breathing while performing physical fitness training. He sought medical treatment. He also had difficulty breathing at night and was awakened by Soldiers who told him he had stopped breathing in his sleep. He had nose bleeds and lost nearly 30 pounds before redeploying back to his home station. It was during his redeployment physical examination that a medical doctor assessed he had problems with his lungs. In the year following his redeployment he underwent many physical examinations and had a surgical biopsy to remove tissue from his lungs so it could be examined. In July 2006, he was diagnosed with pulmonary fibrosis of his lungs. He expresses his sadness that his career ended that day as a Regular Army noncommissioned officer. He underwent an MEB and then a PEB and was initially placed on the temporary disability retired list in 2007. In 2008, he was removed from that list and permanently retired. He had over 16 years of active service when he was medically retired. During his MEB it was his medical doctor who informed him his medical condition was likely caused by his deployment. 4. The applicant was serving in the Regular Army on an indefinite enlistment when his unit from Fort Campbell, Kentucky was ordered to deploy to support operations within the United States Central Command geographic region on or about 14 September 2004. His date of arrival in theater was 23 September 2004. 5. The applicant provided the following medical evidence in support of his application that is not filed within his official military personnel file on the Interactive Personnel Records Management System (iPERMS) maintained by U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC), Fort Knox, Kentucky. a. On 30 April 2005 at Camp Arifjan, Kuwait he sought medical treatment because he was having difficulty breathing. He self-reported he woke up at night because he was coughing and could not catch his breath. His initial diagnosis was acute bronchitis and he was prescribed medication to treat his symptoms. The medical provider stated the applicant’s cough was not work related, not battle related, and was not a battle related illness. b. He departed the theater of operations on 22 September 2005. Prior to his departure he completed DD Form 2796, a post deployment health assessment, and then a medical provider reviewed it, the applicant’s medical records and interviewed him. The medical provider stated there was a need for further medical evaluation of the applicant. c. On 25 September 2005 after undergoing a computed tomography scan (CT Scan) a radiologist report stated the applicant appeared to have bilateral interstitial lung disease, an acute infectious process involving the medial segment of the right middle lobe and the superior singular segment of the left upper lobe could not be excluded. The radiologist suggested clinical correlations to rule out an acute infectious process in the applicant’s lungs. d. On 30 November 2005, a medical provider issued the applicant a temporary physical profile of three (T3) for his overall physical stamina. The doctor stated his medical conditions were an illness or disease and he had been under evaluation for more than 2 months for a pulmonary condition. The applicant required further evaluation by medical specialists. Additionally, it was determined he was required to undergo a Military Occupational Specialty Retention Board because he could not perform various functional activities of soldiering. Additionally, as he could not move with a fighting load at least 2 miles, his medical provider stated he should undergo an MEB and if recommended by the MEB, a PEB. d. On 28 July 2006 he underwent an surgical procedure based on a preoperative diagnosis of diffuse interstitial pulmonary fibrosis with severe dyspnea and shortness of breath which was progressively worsening. The procedure was a left thoracoscopy with thorascopic left lung biopsy. Additionally, a chest tube was attached to the interior of his lung such that it provided suction drainage and expanded his lung. e. On 4 April 2007 the applicant underwent an MEB and its results were recorded on DA Form 3947. There were 10 medical conditions or diagnoses considered by the MEB. The only medically unacceptable diagnosis was progressive idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis under the provisions of Army Regulation 40-501, paragraph 3-7m. The date of approximate origin of this illness/disease was 2005 and he incurred it while he was entitled to basic pay. This condition did not exist prior to service and there was no indication his condition was permanently aggravated by his service. The MEB recommended referral to a PEB. On 17 April 2007 the approval authority approved the findings and recommendations of the MEB. On the DA Form 3947 provided by the applicant, there is no indication the applicant was counseled or made an election at that time. (1) He provided a copy of his MEB narrative summary showing his last physical examination was recorded on DD Form 2808 (Report of Medical Examination) and he also underwent a physical examination by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) on 16 February 2007. The MEB was a physician directed MEB due to the applicant’s medical condition of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis that was not medically acceptable based on regulatory guidance. Of note, he was also treated for a tuberculosis infection for 6 months and that it seemed medically resolved. There were nine other medical conditions evaluated during his physical examination. (2) The MEB medical doctor states the applicant’s medical chart was extensive and included two volumes. He enlisted in 1990. In 1991, he sought treatment for latent tuberculosis infection for which he was prescribed medication for 6 months. He responded well to the prescribed treatment. (3) He was seen irregularly for various ailments that were resolved with minimal treatment, normally medication. (4) He sought treatment in 2005 for a nonproductive cough. Upon physical examination, he was referred to radiology for chest x-rays which revealed basilar infiltrates. He underwent CT scans and biopsies which confirmed peripheral interstitial disease and later a diagnosis of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Two pathologist confirmed a diagnosis of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. (5) The MEB medical doctor opined that the applicant’s medical condition was aggravated by his military service and he states, "Most likely by his deployment." He further concluded the applicant’s duty restrictions were many including he could not perform the Army Physical Fitness Test nor wear his biological and chemical protective mask. He also considered the applicant nondeployable. f. A PEB convened on 30 April 2007 at Fort Sam Houston, Texas. The PEB found the applicant was unfit for his medical condition of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (rapidly progressing) with a disability rating of 100 percent. The PEB determined he should be placed on the temporary disability retired list (TDRL) as his medical condition was not sufficiently stable for final adjudication. He was informed their decision was not a permanent rating or permanent retirement. He was required to undergo periodic medical examinations while on the TDRL. (1) The PEB determined his medical condition was incurred while he was entitled to basic pay, was incurred in the line of duty and was the proximate result of performing military duty. (2) Section 10 of his DA Form 199 states if retired because of disability, the board makes the following recommended findings: (a) The applicant’s retirement is not based on disability from injury or disease received in the line of duty as a direct result of armed conflict or caused by an instrumentality of war and incurring in the line of duty during a period of war as defined by law. (b) The evidence of record reflects the applicant was not a member or obligated to become a member of an armed force or reserve thereof on 24 September 1975. (c) The applicant’s disability did not result from a combat related injury as defined in Title 26, U.S. Code, section 104 (26 USC 104). 6. These documents are filed in his official military personnel file: a. On 17 May 2017 personnel at Fort Campbell, Kentucky issued the applicant Orders releasing him from his assignment and duty because of physical disability incurred while entitled to basic pay and under conditions that permitted his placement on the TDRL. His effective date of retirement was 21 July 2007 and he was placed on the retirement list effective 22 July 2007. His percentage of disability was 100 percent. Further, these orders state: * "Disability is based on injury or disease in LOD [line of duty] as a direct Result of Armed Conflict or caused by an instrumentality of war and incurred in the LOD during a war period as defined by law: No" * "Disability resulted from a combat related injury as defined in 26 USC 104: No" b. In accordance with Orders 137-0615 the applicant was retired effective 21 July 2007 and issued a DD Form 214 documenting his active service. His DD Form 214 confirms he served in Kuwait/Iraq from 23 September 2004 to 16 September 2005. His DD Form 214 contains the following pertinent information: * Block 23 (Type of Separation) – retirement * Block 25 (Separation Authority)) – Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation), paragraph 4-24b(2) * Block 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) – disability, temporary c. On 4 June 2008 a PEB reconvened at Fort Sam Houston, Texas to consider the applicant’s status on the TDRL. The PEB found the applicant unfit for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis retaining his disability rating at 100 percent. The board determined his condition was sufficiently stable for final adjudication and recommended his placement on the permanent disability retired list (PDRL). The applicant was mailed a copy of the PEB (DA Form 199) explaining his rights to him, for his review and rebuttal. He was allowed 10 days from the date of receipt of the documents to respond. He did not respond. On 24 June 2008 a designee for the Secretary of the Army within the U.S. Army Physical Disability Agency (USAPDA) approved the PEB’s findings and recommendations. d. Accordingly, the USAPDA issued the applicant Orders removing him from the TDRL effective 25 June 2008 and then permanently retiring him due to permanent physical disability effective 26 June 2008. His percentage of disability was 100 percent. This order contains the same instructions as shown on Orders ; however, as a previous determination was made these orders show the two statements are now not applicable: * "Disability is based on injury or disease in LOD as a direct Result of Armed Conflict or caused by an instrumentality of war and incurred in the LOD during a war period as defined by law: Not Applicable" * "Disability resulted from a combat related injury as defined in 26 USC 104: Not Applicable" e. He applied for combat-related special compensation (CRSC) on 12 September 2018. The criteria for CRSC requires a Purple Heart related injury (incurred by hostile enemy forces) at or above a rating of 10 percent, or combat-related injuries with a combined rating at or about 60 percent. Within his application he stated he was not a Purple Heart recipient, but he was in receipt of VA disability compensation based on a combined rating of at least 60 percent. He stated his medical diagnoses were idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis with obstructive sleep apnea. He then indicated the origin of his disabilities was during armed conflict in the year 2005 at Camp Navistar, Kuwait. He described his duties serving in a transportation battalion where he handled and transported hazardous material in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. f. On 7 February 2019 the CRSC certifying official at HRC informed the applicant by letter that his medical condition of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis was not combat-related and it was not payable under the rules and law of CRSC. Further, the certifying official stated the VA did not associate his medical condition as combat-related. (He submitted multiple VA rating decisions with his CRSC application showing as of 21 July 2007 during a VA predischarge medical examination his condition of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis with obstructive sleep apnea was service connected incurred during the Gulf War.) 7. The staff of the Army Review Boards Agency requested an advisory opinion from HRC. On 5 August 2020, the Chief of Casualty and Mortuary Affairs Operations Division acting on behalf of the Secretary of the Army responded. HRC stated the applicant’s evidence of record shows he had an illness that was service incurred. The official stated he concurs with the findings of the applicant’s PEB wherein his illness was not based on a disability incurred as a direct result of armed conflict or caused by an instrumentality of war as defined by law. 8. On 25 August 2020 as required by law the applicant was emailed a copy of the HRC advisory for his review and rebuttal. 9. On 10 September 2020 the applicant responded and submitted additional evidence for the Board’s consideration. He restated his MEB doctor and his primary care doctor said his medical condition was aggravated by his service most likely during his overseas deployment. He asserts when he became ill he was on deployment orders effective 17 August 2004. He also states he did contact the USAPDA to contest his combat rating. The USAPDA referred him to the Army Review Boards Agency to correct his record. a. The applicant’s sergeant major submitted a signed statement attesting to his service and supervisory responsibility including directly working with or supervising the applicant during their deployment. He affirms the applicant’s statements that the applicant was medically cleared for deployment by medical personnel at Fort Campbell, Kentucky. The applicant had no medical issues. His battalion deployed in September 2004 and within 5 months of deployment he was informed by the applicant’s chain of command that he was having difficulty breathing for which he was receiving medical treatment. He also states he had personal conversations with the applicant concerning his health. During the redeployment phase the applicant worked directly for him and he expressed his concerns ensuring the applicant understood to remain in contact with him because he was very concerned the applicant’s health condition might be a career ending condition. The applicant’s medical boards determined he should be medically retired. He knows from his experiences as a sergeant major the applicant would have continued his professional career in the U.S. Army to include promotions to higher levels of responsibility. (His former sergeant major is now retired.) b. The applicant’s unit first sergeant during his deployment submitted a signed statement attesting to the fact that prior to deployment the applicant was responsible for the physical fitness training within the unit. He personally motivated unit personnel to ensure they complied with acceptable Army physical fitness training standards. During predeployment training the applicant served as a squad leaders during live fire training exercises and he never faltered from his duties and responsibilities as a squad leader. In September 2004 his unit deployed. Within months he noticed the applicant was having health problems while leading unit physical fitness activities. He easily became winded and had to stop strenuous activities. He sought medical treatment and was seen numerous times while deployed for breathing problems. Upon the applicant’s redeployment medical screen required by all personnel, the examining physician determined the applicant needed further medical evaluation. In the year that followed his redeployment the applicant underwent numerous examinations. From the examinations a medical doctor determined it was the applicant’s deployment that led to his medical condition for which he was eventually medically retired. The first sergeant states, in effect, he knows if the applicant had not deployed and succumbed to a serious health condition he would have continued with his military career advancing through the enlisted ranks. c. A second sergeant major for whom the applicant worked for attested to the fact the applicant deployed with his unit and prior to his deployment he was medically cleared to deploy with no identified medical conditions. This sergeant major also submitted a signed statement. On occasion it was reported other noncommissioned officers (NCO) woke the applicant up during the night because he had trouble breathing when he was sleeping. During physical fitness training he observed the applicant having trouble breathing while running or conducting other strenuous physical activities. He knows the applicant sought medical treatment while deployed for his breathing issues. After the unit returned he was aware the applicant still had numerous medical appointments for his medical conditions and received a physical profile limiting his physical activities. His physical profile prevented him from attending advanced NCO training and led to his medical boards. The medical boards determined he was unfit for duty and his career ended because he was medically retired. He concludes by stating had it not been for the deployment the applicant would have continued his career in the U.S. Army. d. He submits documents from his MEB showing his diagnosis of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (progressive) was aggravated by his service and most likely by his deployment. The excerpts he provided from his MEB medical examination was signed by a medical doctor who practiced internal medicine. The doctor was a U.S. Army officer in the rank of captain in the medical corps. 10. Title 26, U.S. Code, section 104 (Compensation for injuries or sickness) for the purpose of federal income taxes the gross income of an individual does not include in pertinent part: a. Amounts received as a pension, annuity, or similar allowance for personal injuries or sickness resulting from active service in the armed forces of any country or in the Coast and Geodetic Survey or the Public Health Service, or as a disability annuity payable under the provisions of section 808 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 (See paragraph c below); b. Amounts received by an individual as disability income attributable to injuries incurred as a direct result of a terroristic or military action (as defined in section 692(c)(2)); and c. Special rules for combat-related injuries - for purposes of this subsection, the term "combat-related injury" means personal injury or sickness which is incurred as a direct result of armed conflict, while engaged in extra hazardous service, or under conditions simulating war; or which is caused by an instrumentality of war (emphasis added). The only amounts taken into account shall be the amounts which he receives by reason of a combat-related injury. Amounts excluded to be not less than veterans’ disability compensation. 11. The Army rates only conditions determined to be physically unfitting at the time of discharge, which disqualify the Soldier from further military service. The Army disability rating is to compensate the individual for the loss of a military career. The VA may compensate the individual for loss of civilian employability. 12. Title 38, U.S. Code, Sections 1110 and 1131, permit the VA to award compensation for disabilities which were incurred in or aggravated by active military service. However, an award of a VA rating does not establish an error or injustice on the part of the Army. 13. Title 38, Code of Federal Regulations, Part IV is the VA’s schedule for rating disabilities. The VA awards disability ratings to veterans for service-connected conditions, including those conditions detected after discharge. As a result, the VA, operating under different policies, may award a disability rating where the Army did not find the member to be unfit to perform his duties. Unlike the Army, the VA can evaluate a veteran throughout his or her lifetime, adjusting the percentage of disability based upon that agency's examinations and findings. BOARD DISCUSSION: 1. After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found that relief is not warranted. 2. The Board noted that for an injury or illness to be combat related, it must have been incurred as a direct result of armed conflict, while engaged in in extra-hazardous service, or under conditions simulating war, or have been caused by an instrumentality of war. The Board found insufficient evidence indicating his illness was incurred under any of the conditions that would support a finding that the illness was combat related. Based on a preponderance of evidence, the Board determined there is no error, injustice, or inequity in the determination that his illness was not combat related. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : GRANT FULL RELIEF : : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING :X :X :X DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. REFERENCES: 1. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3 year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. 2. Department of Defense Instruction (DODI) 1332.38 (Physical Disability Evaluation), paragraph E3.P5.2.2 (Combat-Related), covers those injuries and diseases attributable to the special dangers associated with armed conflict or the preparation or training for armed conflict. A physical disability shall be considered combat related if it makes the member unfit or contributes to unfitness and was incurred under any of the following circumstances: * as a direct result of armed conflict * while engaged in hazardous service * under conditions simulating war * caused by an instrumentality of war 3. DODI 1332.38, paragraph E3.P5.2.2.3 (Under Conditions Simulating War), in general, covers disabilities resulting from military training, such as war games, practice alerts, tactical exercises, airborne operations, leadership reaction courses, grenade and live-fire weapons practice, bayonet training, hand-to-hand combat training, rappelling, and negotiation of combat confidence and obstacle courses. It does not include physical training activities, such as calisthenics and jogging or formation running and supervised sports. 4. Appendix 5 (Administrative Determinations) to enclosure 3 of DODI 1332.18 (Disability Evaluation System) (DES) currently in effect, defines armed conflict and instrumentality of war. a. Incurred in Combat with an Enemy of the United States. The disease or injury was incurred in the LOD in combat with an enemy of the United States. b. Armed Conflict. The disease or injury was incurred in the LOD as a direct result of armed conflict (see Glossary) in accordance with sections 3501 and 6303 of Reference (d). The fact that a Service member may have incurred a disability during a period of war, in an area of armed conflict, or while participating in combat operations is not sufficient to support this finding. There must be a definite causal relationship between the armed conflict and the resulting unfitting disability. c. Engaged in Hazardous Service. Such service includes, but is not limited to, aerial flight duty, parachute duty, demolition duty, experimental stress duty, and diving duty. d. Under Conditions Simulating War. In general, this covers disabilities resulting from military training, such as war games, practice alerts, tactical exercises, airborne operations, and leadership reaction courses; grenade and live fire weapons practice; bayonet training; hand-to-hand combat training; rappelling; and negotiation of combat confidence and obstacle courses. It does not include physical training activities, such as calisthenics and jogging or formation running and supervised sports. e. Caused by an Instrumentality of War. Occurrence during a period of war is not a requirement to qualify. If the disability was incurred during any period of service as a result of wounds caused by a military weapon, accidents involving a military combat vehicle, injury or sickness caused by fumes, gases, or explosion of military ordnance, vehicles, or material, the criteria are met. However, there must be a direct causal relationship between the instrumentality of war and the disability. For example, an injury resulting from a Service member falling on the deck of a ship while participating in a sports activity would not normally be considered an injury caused by an instrumentality of war (the ship) since the sports activity and not the ship caused the fall. The exception occurs if the operation of the ship caused the fall. 5. Title 10, U.S. Code, chapter 61, provides the Secretaries of the Military Departments with authority to retire or discharge a member if they find the member unfit to perform military duties because of physical disability. The U.S. Army Physical Disability Agency is responsible for administering the Army physical disability evaluation system and executes Secretary of the Army decision-making authority as directed by Congress in chapter 61 and in accordance with DOD Directive 1332.18 and Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation). a. Soldiers are referred to the disability system when they no longer meet medical retention standards in accordance with Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness), chapter 3, as evidenced in an MEB; when they receive a permanent medical profile rating of 3 or 4 in any factor and are referred by an MOS Medical Retention Board; and/or they are command-referred for a fitness-for-duty medical examination. b. The disability evaluation assessment process involves two distinct stages: the MEB and PEB. The purpose of the MEB is to determine whether the service member's injury or illness is severe enough to compromise his/her ability to return to full duty based on the job specialty designation of the branch of service. A PEB is an administrative body possessing the authority to determine whether or not a service member is fit for duty. A designation of "unfit for duty" is required before an individual can be separated from the military because of an injury or medical condition. Service members who are determined to be unfit for duty due to disability either are separated from the military or are permanently retired, depending on the severity of the disability and length of military service. Individuals who are "separated" receive a one-time severance payment, while veterans who retire based upon disability receive monthly military retired pay and have access to all other benefits afforded to military retirees. c. The mere presence of a medical impairment does not in and of itself justify a finding of unfitness. In each case, it is necessary to compare the nature and degree of physical disability present with the requirements of the duties the Soldier may reasonably be expected to perform because of his or her office, grade, rank, or rating. Reasonable performance of the preponderance of duties will invariably result in a finding of fitness for continued duty. A Soldier is physically unfit when a medical impairment prevents reasonable performance of the duties required of the Soldier's office, grade, rank, or rating. 6. Title 38, U.S. Code, section 1110 (General - Basic Entitlement) states for disability resulting from personal injury suffered or disease contracted in line of duty, or for aggravation of a preexisting injury suffered or disease contracted in line of duty, in the active military, naval, or air service, during a period of war, the United States will pay to any veteran thus disabled and who was discharged or released under conditions other than dishonorable from the period of service in which said injury or disease was incurred, or preexisting injury or disease was aggravated, compensation as provided in this subchapter, but no compensation shall be paid if the disability is a result of the veteran's own willful misconduct or abuse of alcohol or drugs. 7. Title 38, U.S. Code, section 1131 (Peacetime Disability Compensation - Basic Entitlement) states for disability resulting from personal injury suffered or disease contracted in line of duty, or for aggravation of a preexisting injury suffered or disease contracted in line of duty, in the active military, naval, or air service, during other than a period of war, the United States will pay to any veteran thus disabled and who was discharged or released under conditions other than dishonorable from the period of service in which said injury or disease was incurred, or preexisting injury or disease was aggravated, compensation as provided in this subchapter, but no compensation shall be paid if the disability is a result of the veteran's own willful misconduct or abuse of alcohol or drugs. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20200000120 10 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1