BOARD DATE: 12 April 2018 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160005898 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. . BOARD DATE: 12 April 2018 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160005898 BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : GRANT FULL RELIEF : : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING ::x :x :x DENY APPLICATION 2 Enclosures 1. Board Determination/Recommendation 2. Evidence and Consideration BOARD DATE: 12 April 2018 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160005898 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests, in effect, correction of his records to show he was separated from military service based on permanent physical disability. He also requests a personal appearance before the Board. 2. The applicant states he should have been referred to a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) and a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) before he was released from active duty (REFRAD) upon expiration term of service (ETS). He states that he served three (3) tours of duty in Iraq totaling more than 27 months that included the Liberation of Iraq, Transition of Iraqi Government, and Iraqi Sovereignty campaigns. a. He states that he had significant combat injuries and he was too damaged (mentally and physically) to continue his military career. He brought his condition to the attention of his chain of command, but he was dismissed (told to "continue the mission"). Two Army physicians at Fort Bragg, NC, told him he should be assigned to the Warrior Transition Unit (WTU) for medical evaluation and treatment. However, instead of being assigned to the WTU, he was REFRAD. b. He states that the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has granted him a combined disability rating of 100 percent (%) that includes post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) rated at 70%. In addition, the VA declared him unemployable the day after he was REFRAD. He adds that he attends therapy on a weekly basis and he is unable to provide for his family. He asserts Army officials did not properly assess his medical condition(s) and he should be reinstated into the U.S. Army for referral to an MEB/PEB. 3. The applicant provides copies of his – * DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) * Enlisted Record Brief * post-deployment assessment * military medical records * VA rating decisions CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 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. While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing. 2. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) on 14 January 2002 for a period of 4 years. Upon completion of training he was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 25F (Network Switching Systems Operator/ Maintainer). 3. He reenlisted in the RA on 3 April 2006 for a period of 4 years and reclassified into MOS 25S (Satellite Communications System Operator/Maintainer). He attained the rank of staff sergeant/pay grade E-6 on 1 January 2008. 4. His Enlisted Record Brief, dated 8 February 2010, shows in – * Section I (Assignment Information–Overseas/Deployment Combat Duty) – * Iraq – * 9 April 2003 – 7 April 2004 * 1 March 2005 – 8 November 2005 * 23 January 2009 – 16 August 2009 * Korea: 23 May 2007 – 10 April 2008 * Section IV (Personal/Family Data) – * PULHES: "121111 B" * APFT ((Army Physical Fitness Test) Date, Pass/Fail Score: August 2009, Passed, 290 points (out of a possible 300 points) * Last Physical Exam: 1 September 2009 * MMRB (MOS Medical Retention Board) Results/Date, is blank (i.e., no entry) 5. A DA Form 2166-8 (NCO [Noncommissioned Officer] Evaluation Report), covering the period 29 September 2009 through 18 March 2010, shows – * the applicant – * passed the APFT on 27 January 2010 * met the Army height/weight standards * the rater rated him "Among the Best" * the senior rater rated his – * overall performance: "Successful (1)" * overall potential: "Superior (1)" 6. Headquarters, U.S. Army Garrison, Fort Bragg, NC, Orders 036-0253, dated 5 February 2010, reassigned the applicant to the U.S. Army Transition Point on 10 February 2010 for separation from the RA effective 2 April 2010. The additional instructions show, in pertinent part, "If you desire an ETS physical prior to separation, contact the medical treatment facility to schedule and [sic] appointment [not later than] 45 days before the start of transition leave or separation date." 7. A DD Form 214 shows the applicant entered active duty this period on 14 January 2002 and he was honorably discharged on 2 April 2010 based on completion of required active service. a. He had completed 7 years, 10 months, and 16 days of net/total active service this period that included 3 years, 1 month, and 19 days of foreign service. b. Item 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) shows the – * Army Commendation Medal (4th Award) * Joint Service Achievement Medal * Army Achievement Medal (4th Award) * Meritorious Unit Commendation (2nd Award) * Army Good Conduct Medal (2nd Award) * National Defense Service Medal * Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal * Global War on Terrorism Service Medal * Korean Defense Service Medal * Iraq Campaign Medal with 3 Bronze Service Stars * NCO Professional Development Ribbon with Numeral 2 * Army Service Ribbon * Overseas Service Ribbon (3rd Award) * Parachutist Badge * Driver and Mechanic Badge with "M" (Mechanic) Bar 8. A review of the applicant's military personnel records failed to reveal any evidence that he was referred to an MMRB, MEB/PEB, or that he completed a separation physical examination. 9. In support of his request the applicant provides the following documents: a. DD Form 2697 (Report of Medical Assessment), dated 1 December 2005, that shows the health care provider noted, in pertinent part, "per SM's [Service Member's] documentation, was diagnosed and treated for PTSD and social phobia during mobilization. Currently continues treatment/medications. SM will continue care with TMC [Troop Medical Clinic]/Behavioral Medicine." b. Soldier Deployment History Outprocessing Report, dated 8 March 2010, that shows he deployed – * 3 April 2003 – 5 April 2004 * 1 March 2005 – 8 November 2005 * 23 January 2009 – 23 July 2009 c. Copies of his military and civilian medical records. (A detailed review and summary of the medical records is provided later in this Record of Proceedings by a medical official in a medical advisory opinion.) d. VA rating decision letters, dated 5 and 14 February 2011; 27 April; 26 and 30 August 2011; 31 August 2012; and 6 November 2015. (1) They show, in pertinent part, he was granted service connection for the following disabilities, effective 3 April 2010 (unless otherwise noted) – * PTSD (claimed as mood disorder, depression, social phobia, anxiety, memory loss, and sleep disturbances) (70%) * tinnitus (10%) * lumbar intervertebral disc degeneration (10%), increased to 20%, effective 12 July 2011 * left shoulder supraspinatus tear (10%) * acne (0%) * right thumb sprain (0%) * migraines (0%), increased to 10%, effective 11 July 2012 * erectile dysfunction (0%) * loss of use of a creative organ (not rated) * sleep apnea (50%), effective 12 July 2011 (2) He was granted temporary 100% disability evaluation based on a hospital stay of 22 days or more (i.e., from 20 January 2011 to 31 March 2011) for PTSD. An evaluation of 70% was assigned effective 1 April 2011. (3) He was granted 100% individual unemployability effective 3 April 2010 and an overall combined rating of 90% effective 1 August 2011. 10. In the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was obtained from the Army Review Boards Agency (ARBA) medical staff, dated 14 August 2017. a. The ARBA medical advisor (a psychologist) reviewed the applicant's military personnel records, Department of Defense (DoD) electronic medical records, VA medical records, and medical records provided by the applicant. (1) Her review of the applicant's military medical records shows, in pertinent part – * Diagnoses: attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) (November 2005), social phobia (November 2005), adjustment disorder (December 2006), anxiety (June 2007), depression (July 2007), sleep disorder (January 2010), and alcohol disorder (January 2010) * Medications: Tramadol, Wellbutrin, Atharax, Ativan, Lexapro, and Buspar * History of a suicide attempt (age 17) by overdosing on pills and alcohol and suicidal ideation (in-service, December 2009) with a plan to use a gun (Note: A Standard Form (SF) 600 (Chronological Record of Medical Care), dated 22 February 2010, 1105 hours, prepared by BCM (Medical Provider), Psychiatry Clinic, Womack Army Medical Center, shows in the History of Present Illness section, "The patient is a 27 year old male. Source of patient information was patient. Source of patient information was medical records. In the Army and currently on active duty. Visit is not deployment-related. MOS 25S – Satellite Communications. A previous suicide attempt. See AHLTA. SM reports when he was 17 years old he tried to kill himself by combination of ETOH [alcohol] and OD [overdose] on pills. SM reports he was hospitalized for 2 weeks." Also, "SM reports last SI [suicidal ideation] was in December 2009 reporting he was looking for a gun that would 'do the job and not leave me like a vegetable'.") (2) The ARBA medical advisor referenced a military medical note, dated 22 February 2010, that shows a medical provider recommended the applicant receive an MEB to evaluate his condition (depression). However, an MEB was not conducted because the applicant indicated he did not want an MEB for the condition. He wanted to get out of the service as soon as possible in order to make his marriage work. He would consider going through the VA for further care. The treatment plan indicated the applicant was deployable, considered at moderate risk for safety, and should follow-up with the VA or an MEB. (3) His military medical records did not include a diagnosis of PTSD; however, a Report of Medical Assessment, dated 1 December 2004, noted PTSD and social phobia. No profile was issued for PTSD, depression, or another behavioral health (BH) condition during his time in service. He received temporary profiles for lower back pain (April 2006), a torn rotator cuff (November 2008), and lower extremity swelling (December 2008). (4) A review of his VA medical records indicated service connection for PTSD with alcohol use disorder and cannabis use disorder rated at 70% effective 3 April 2010. The rating was based on reported symptoms of anxiety, depression, sleep impairment, episodes of violence, hyperarousal, mildly impaired memory, occupational and social impairment, and suicidal ideation. She noted he was admitted to a PTSD domiciliary program from 20 January 2011 to 31 March 2011. b. The medical advisor found no evidence that the applicant met criteria for a boardable BH condition during his time in service. He endorsed some PTSD symptoms, but was treated primarily for depression in response to marital stressors. Although he did continue to experience continued depression, there is no indication that this condition did not meet medical retention standards or that he was not able to effectively perform his assigned military duties. The medical advisor added that her observation does not negate the applicant's post-service diagnosis of PTSD from the VA; however, the VA conducts evaluations based on different standards and regulations. c. The ARBA medical advisor concluded that the applicant's medical conditions were duly considered during his medical separation processing. She found no evidence of a medical disability or condition which would support a change to the reason for the discharge in this case. 11. On 16 August 2017, the applicant was provided a copy of the ARBA advisory opinion to allow him the opportunity (14 days) to submit comments or a rebuttal. 12. On 8 September 2017, the applicant indicated that he does not believe the advisory opinion reflects his service and sacrifice to the Nation nor the factual events and circumstances pertaining to his case. He requested an extension of the deadline to provide a detailed response to the advisory option. 13. On 30 September 2017, the applicant provided his response. He noted that he was unable to obtain the assistance of the VA Wounded Warrior Assistant who initially helped him with his application. He provided the following rebuttals to the advisory opinion – * his correct active duty dates are 14 January 2002 to 10 (sic) April 2010 * he was reclassified into MOS 25S in 2006 and served in Army Special Operations Command (SOC) units from that point on in his military career * his condition was well documented prior to his third deployment – * he informed members of his chain of command and a chaplain that he was unfit for deployment * he sought a compassionate reassignment and/or limited duty * within 30 days of redeployment he was at Womack Army Medical Center for suicidal plans and ideation – * he was preparing to register a firearm at the time * he was not given proper medical treatment during this time * he was prescribed sedating narcotics, including opiates (even while he was deployed just to "keep [him] in the fight") * he sought psychiatric and psychological counseling to maintain his sanity and also to keep his security clearance * the SOC clinic captain who cleared him for ETS is the same officer who reviewed his medical records and recommended assignment to the WTU * the diagnosis of ADHD was determined to be erroneous (either in childhood or adult onset) and removed from his VA medical record * the 5 February 2011 VA medical record referred to indicating PTSD with alcohol and cannabis use disorder is 100% misleading and false * his medical history at the VA Medical Center, Wilmington, DE, (from June 2010 to present) confirms a diagnosis of service-connected PTSD * there was no suicide attempt made by him at age 17 – * the incident was a 3-day hospitalization (December 2001) after a going away party * it was 2 weeks prior to entering military service and his entry into the military undoubtedly would have been denied * his quick decision to leave military service was made when he was not of sound and healthy mind * he was and is suffering from a mental deficit and wanted to join a family support system * the VA granted him 100% permanent/total individual unemployability – * he has not worked since leaving military service * he requires a caregiver (his wife) for safety and functional assistance * his quality of life is zero * he fails to see how a treatment plan could accurately/medically indicate that he was deployable given the medications he was prescribed * he states his PTSD is medication and treatment resistant * he asks the Board, "Again, if I was at a 'moderate' risk for safety, how could I be deployable?" * he maintains that his disabilities were well documented and present at the time of ETS * he asserts the ARBA medical advisor should be required to accurately state/correct the record – * he has not consumed alcohol since 26 May 2010 * he has had frequent (negative) alcohol and drug urinalysis since 2010 * in 2016, with physician approval, he stopped 14 daily medications * in March 2016, he started using prescribed, legal medical cannabis in the Delaware Medical Marijuana Program * he requests personal appearance before the Board along with his caregiver and service dog REFERENCES: 1. PTSD can occur after someone goes through a traumatic event like combat, assault, or disaster. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) is published by the American Psychiatric Association (APA) and it provides standard criteria and common language for the classification of mental disorders. In 1980, the APA added PTSD to the third edition of its DSM-III nosologic classification scheme. Although controversial when first introduced, the PTSD diagnosis has filled an important gap in psychiatric theory and practice. From an historical perspective, the significant change ushered in by the PTSD concept was the stipulation that the etiological agent was outside the individual (i.e., a traumatic event) rather than an inherent individual weakness (i.e., a traumatic neurosis). The key to understanding the scientific basis and clinical expression of PTSD is the concept of "trauma." 2. PTSD is unique among psychiatric diagnoses because of the great importance placed upon the etiological agent, the traumatic stressor. In fact, one cannot make a PTSD diagnosis unless the patient has actually met the "stressor criterion," which means that he or she has been exposed to an event that is considered traumatic. Clinical experience with the PTSD diagnosis has shown, however, that there are individual differences regarding the capacity to cope with catastrophic stress. Therefore, while most people exposed to traumatic events do not develop PTSD, others go on to develop the full-blown syndrome. Such observations have prompted the recognition that trauma, like pain, is not an external phenomenon that can be completely objectified. Like pain, the traumatic experience is filtered through cognitive and emotional processes before it can be appraised as an extreme threat. Because of individual differences in this appraisal process, different people appear to have different trauma thresholds, some more protected from and some more vulnerable to developing clinical symptoms after exposure to extremely stressful situations. 3. The DSM fifth revision (DSM-5) was released in May 2013. This revision includes changes to the diagnostic criteria for PTSD and acute stress disorder. The PTSD diagnostic criteria were revised to take into account things that have been learned from scientific research and clinical experience. The revised diagnostic criteria for PTSD include a history of exposure to a traumatic event that meets specific stipulations, along with symptoms from each of four symptom clusters: intrusion, avoidance, negative alterations in cognitions and mood, and alterations in arousal and reactivity. The sixth criterion concerns duration of symptoms; the seventh assesses functioning; and the eighth criterion clarifies symptoms as not attributable to a substance or co-occurring medical condition. 4. As a result of the extensive research conducted by the medical community and the relatively recent issuance of revised criteria regarding the causes, diagnosis, and treatment of PTSD the DOD acknowledges that some Soldiers who were administratively discharged may have had an undiagnosed condition of PTSD at the time of their discharge. It is also acknowledged that in some cases this undiagnosed condition of PTSD may have been a mitigating factor in the Soldier's misconduct which served as a catalyst for their discharge. Research has also shown that misconduct stemming from PTSD is typically based upon a spur of the moment decision resulting from temporary lapse in judgment; therefore, PTSD is not a likely cause for either premeditated misconduct or misconduct that continues for an extended period of time. 5. In view of the foregoing, on 3 September 2014, the Secretary of Defense directed the Service Discharge Review Boards and Service Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records (BCM/NRs) to carefully consider the revised PTSD criteria, detailed medical considerations and mitigating factors when taking action on applications from former service members administratively discharged and who have been diagnosed with PTSD by a competent mental health professional representing a civilian healthcare provider in order to determine if it would be appropriate to upgrade the characterization of the applicant's service. 6. BCM/NRs are not courts, nor are they investigative agencies. Therefore, the determinations will be based upon a thorough review of the available military records and the evidence provided by each applicant on a case-by-case basis. When determining if PTSD was the causative factor for an applicant's misconduct and whether an upgrade is warranted, the following factors must be carefully considered – * Is it reasonable to determine that PTSD or PTSD-related conditions existed at the time of discharge? * Does the applicant's record contain documentation of the occurrence of a traumatic event during the period of service? * Does the applicant's military record contain documentation of a diagnosis of PTSD or PTSD-related symptoms? * Did the applicant provide documentation of a diagnosis of PTSD or PTSD-related symptoms rendered by a competent mental health professional representing a civilian healthcare provider? * Was the applicant's condition determined to have existed prior to military service? * Was the applicant's condition determined to be incurred during or aggravated by military service? * Do mitigating factors exist in the applicant's case? * Did the applicant have a history of misconduct prior to the occurrence of the traumatic event? * Was the applicant's misconduct premeditated? * How serious was the misconduct? 7. Although DOD acknowledges that some Soldiers who were administratively discharged may have had an undiagnosed condition of PTSD at the time of their discharge, it is presumed that they were properly discharged based upon the evidence that was available at the time. Conditions documented in the record that can reasonably be determined to have existed at the time of discharge will be considered to have existed at the time of discharge. In cases in which PTSD or PTSD-related conditions may be reasonably determined to have existed at the time of discharge; those conditions will be considered potential mitigating factors in the misconduct that caused the characterization of service. Corrections Boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat-related PTSD or PTSD-related conditions as a causative factor in the misconduct resulting in discharge will be carefully weighed against the severity of the misconduct. PTSD is not a likely cause of premeditated misconduct. Corrections Boards will also exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in all cases of misconduct by carefully considering the likely causal relationship of symptoms to the misconduct. 8. On 25 August 2017 the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness issued clarifying guidance for the Secretary of Defense Directive to DRBs and BCM/NRs when considering requests by Veterans for modification of their discharges due in whole or in part to: mental health conditions, including PTSD; traumatic brain injury; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Boards are to give liberal consideration to Veterans petitioning for discharge relief when the application for relief is based in whole or in part on those conditions or experiences. The guidance further describes evidence sources and criteria and requires Boards to consider the conditions or experiences presented in evidence as potential mitigation for misconduct that led to the discharge. 9. AR 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation), sets forth policies, responsibilities, and procedures in determining whether a Soldier is unfit because of physical disability to reasonably perform the duties of his or her office, grade, rank, or rating. 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. Separation by reason of disability requires processing through Integrated Disability Evaluations System. a. Chapter 3 (Policies), paragraph 3-5 (Use of the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities), shows that only the unfitting conditions or defects and those which contribute to unfitness will be considered in arriving at the rated degree of incapacity warranting retirement or separation for disability. b. Chapter 4 (Procedures), paragraph 4-10, shows that MEBs 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 qualification for retention based on criteria in AR 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness), chapter 3. If the MEB determines the Soldier does not meet retention standards, the board will recommend referral of the Soldier to a PEB. c. Disability compensation is provided to Soldiers whose service is interrupted and who can no longer continue to reasonably perform because of a physical disability incurred or aggravated in service. It also allows Soldiers to appeal the decisions of the various boards and agencies involved in determining a Soldier's disability ratings. d. The Army's determination of a Soldier's physical fitness or unfitness is a factual finding based on the individual's ability to perform the duties of his or her grade, rank, or rating. If the Soldier is found to be physically unfit, a disability rating is awarded by the Army and is permanent in nature. The Army system requires that the Soldier be rated as the condition(s) exist(s) at the time of the PEB hearing. The VA may find a Soldier unfit by reason of a service-connected disability and may even assign a higher rating after separation. The VA's ratings are based on an individual's ability to gain employment as a civilian and may fluctuate within a period of time depending on the changes in the disability. 10. Title 10, United States Code, shows: * section 1201 provides for the physical disability retirement of a member who has a disability rated at least 30% * section 1203 provides for the physical disability separation with severance pay of a member who has less than 20 years of service and a disability rated at less than 30% 11. AR 15-185 (ABCMR) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the ABCMR. Paragraph 2-11 states that applicants do not have a right to a hearing before the ABCMR. The Director of the ABCMR or an ABCMR panel may grant a formal hearing whenever justice requires. DISCUSSION: 1. The applicant contends that his records should be corrected to show he was separated from military service based on permanent physical disability. He also requests personal appearance before the Board. 2. The applicant's request for a personal appearance hearing was carefully considered. However, by regulation, an applicant is not entitled to a hearing before the ABCMR. Hearings may be authorized by a panel of the ABCMR or by the Director of the ABCMR. In this case, the evidence of record and independent evidence provided by the applicant are sufficient to render a fair and equitable decision at this time. 3. This Board is to give liberal consideration to Veterans petitioning for discharge relief when the application for relief is based in whole or in part on mental health conditions, including PTSD. 4. The applicant enlisted in the RA on 14 January 2002. a. He served in Iraq from 9 April 2003 to 7 April 2004 and from 1 March 2005 to 8 November 2005. b. On 1 December 2005, during a post-deployment assessment, a medical provider noted the applicant was diagnosed and treated for PTSD and social phobia during his previous mobilization. However, a thorough review of his military medical records by the ARBA medical advisor failed to reveal a diagnosis of PTSD. c. The applicant reenlisted in the RA on 3 April 2006 and he served in Iraq from 23 January 2009 to 16 August 2009. d. On 22 February 2010, a medical provider recommended the applicant receive an MEB to evaluate his condition (depression). However, the applicant declined referral to the physical disability evaluation system because he wanted to be discharged as soon as possible. He also expressed his desire to pursue medical treatment for his condition(s) through the VA. e. Prior to his discharge (based on completion of required active service), he was rated fully successful in his final NCOER. He was honorably discharged on 2 April 2010. f. The ARBA medical advisor found no evidence that the applicant met criteria for a boardable BH condition during his time in service. The applicant endorsed some PTSD symptoms, but he was treated primarily for depression in response to marital stressors. The medical advisor concluded there is no evidence of a medical disability or condition which would support a change to the discharge in this case. 5. The sincerity of the applicant's comments in his rebuttal with respect to his personal history are not in dispute. However, his medical records that were prepared based on previous reports he made to medical providers are at odds with his rebuttal statement. 6. There is no evidence of record that shows the applicant had an unfitting physical or mental condition during his military service that precluded him from reasonably performing the duties of his office, grade, rank, or rating. a. The applicant's medical conditions were duly considered during his separation processing. b. He met medical retention standards at the time he was discharged. 7. The evidence of record shows the VA has granted the applicant 100% individual unemployability effective 3 April 2010 and an overall combined rating of 90% effective 1 August 2011. However, in and of itself, this is not evidence that the applicant did not meet Army medical retention standards at the time of his discharge. 8. Both the statutory and regulatory guidance provide that the Army rates only conditions determined to be physically unfitting that were incurred or aggravated during the period of service. Furthermore, the condition(s) can only be rated to the extent that the condition(s) limit(s) the performance of duty. The VA, on the other hand, provides compensation for disabilities which it determines were incurred in or aggravated by active military service, including those that are detected after discharge, and which impair the individual's industrial or social functioning. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160005898 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160005898 4 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2