MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:           17 December 2002                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002077128

	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	
	Mr. Edmund P. Mercanti		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Luther L. Santiful		Chairperson	
	Ms. Barbara J. Ellis		Member	
	Mr. William D. Powers		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, that his separation document be corrected to show that he was discharged due to a medical condition which had its inception while he was on active duty.

APPLICANT STATES:  He never had kidney or bladder problems before he entered on active duty.  However, he had to have his kidney removed after he was discharged.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military personnel records could not be located and are presumed to have been destroyed in the fire at the records repository at St. Louis, Missouri, in 1973.  However, the Board was provided his military medical records, including a copy of his separation document, which show:

He was inducted and entered on active duty on 24 April 1951.  

On 8 June 1951, the applicant was admitted to a military hospital, “ . . . with a history of terminal, gross hematuria [the presence of blood or blood cells in the urine] present intermittently for the past 1-2 months . . .”

The applicant continued to receive medical treatment, both inpatient and outpatient, and was given a final diagnosis of hydronephrosis (cystic distension of the kidney caused by the accumulation of urine in the renal pelvis as a result of obstruction to outflow and accompanied by atrophy of the kidney structure and cyst formation), left, secondary to obstruction at uretero-pelvic junction, and prostatitis (inflammation of the prostate gland), chronic, moderate.

In an evaluation dated 1 October 1951 it was stated “In view of the fact this patient has been rather obstrepirous since being told he has hydronephrosis and apparently assigning more symptoms to this situation than usually found, it is felt he would probably be of little value to the service post-operatively following a plastic repair of the left hydronephrosis, consequently he will be separated from the service rather than being subjected to surgical correction of a defect known to exist prior to induction.”

Accordingly, the applicant was honorably discharged on 23 October 1951 due to disability existing prior to entry on active duty and not aggravated by military service.

Army Regulation 600-8-1, paragraph 41-8 states, in pertinent part, that if an Existing Prior To Service (EPTS) condition was aggravated by military service, the finding will be in line of duty.  If an EPTS condition is not aggravated by military service, the finding will be not in line of duty, not due to own misconduct (NLD-NDOM) EPTS.  Specific findings of natural progress of the pre-existing injury or disease based on well established medical principles alone are enough to overcome the presumption of service aggravation.

The Court of Claims and the Comptroller General of the United States have held that short periods of active duty do not give rise to the presumption of the cause of an illness or disease.

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

1.  The applicant was first treated for the symptoms of his illnesses on 8 June 1951.  At that time he reported having those symptoms intermittently for 1 or 2 months.  This would place the date the applicant started experiencing symptoms right at the date he entered active duty, if not earlier.

2.  Illnesses such as those suffered by the applicant do not appear overnight.  They take a certain amount of time before they manifest symptoms.  As such, even though the applicant may not have experienced any symptoms prior to his entry on active duty, that would not imply that he did not have the condition prior to his entry on active duty.

3.  The physicians treating the applicant determined that his illnesses existed prior to his entry on active duty.  The applicant has not submitted any evidence or argument which would show that determination was in error.

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

__lls____  ___wdp __  ___bje__  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002077128	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20021217	
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.	110.02	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.