IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 24 May 2023 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20220005830 APPLICANT REQUESTS: * physical disability retirement in lieu of retirement for length of service * promotion to the rank/grade of sergeant major (SGM)/E-9 APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENT(S) CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * State of North Carolina, Joint Force Headquarters Order 099-900, 25 April 2019 * State of North Carolina, Joint Force Headquarters Order 163-886, 12 June 2019 * partial Order of Merit List (OML), 2 October 2019 * DA Form 3349-SG (Physical Profile Record), 11 October 2019 * DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) covering the period ending 31 January 2020 * North Carolina Army National Guard (ARNG), Army Element Joint Force Headquarters Order 0000185074.00, 4 February 2020 * Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) letter, 24 March 2022 * eBenefits printout, undated * Social Security Administration (SSA) letter, 24 March 2022 FACTS: 1. The applicant states: a. He is requesting a medical retirement determination due to the overwhelming medical issues he had while on active duty. Due to the overwhelming evidence of medical disabilities, he should have been sent for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) and Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) and processed for a medical retirement with placement on the Permanent Disability Retired List (PDRL). b. He is additionally requesting correctio of orders to reflect his retired rank/grade as SGM/E-9 due to being a graduate of the U.S. Army Sergeants Major Academy (USASMA) and being on the OML before, during, and after his retirement. c. Disability determination was not conducted until after his regular retirement paperwork was submitted and he was not advised to submit for a medical retirement. After less than 12 months’ processing for retirement, he was advised to just retired as he had more than 30 years of service and the medical route would have extended the process for up to 2 additional years. He should have been sent to an MEB/PEB and placed on the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL)/PDRL as a result of the overwhelming medical evidence provided prior to his retirement. d. His retirement decision came when his inability to perform his Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) functions of active service due to his physical disabilities. Prior to his retirement, he was on a permanent profile for two events of the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) due to the disabilities of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), two back surgeries, and sleep apnea. His decreasing physical abilities prevented him from performing the physical requirements of his 13 Series (Field Artillery) and 92 Series (Supply and Services) MOSs to their required extent due to being medically prescribed a Veridesk based on his physical profile, because of the limitations of sitting and standing for longer periods of time. Additionally, he has been deemed unable to work and unemployable by the SSA due to the medical issues he incurred from 32 years of military service and has been on Social Security disability since his departure from the military. 2. The applicant enlisted in the ARNG on 14 May 1987 and throughout his career was awarded the MOSs 13B (Cannon Crewmember), 13C (Fire Control Noncommissioned Officer NCO), and 92Y (Supply Sergeant). 3. A DD Form 214 shows the applicant was ordered to active duty in the Active Guard/Reserve (AGR) on 1 April 1997 and was honorably released from active duty on 30 September 2003, for the purpose of AGR mobilized service in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF). 4. A second DD Form 214 shows the applicant was ordered to active duty in support of OIF on 1 October 2003, with duty in Iraq from 29 February 2004 through 29 December 2004. He was honorably released from active duty on 1 February 2005, due to completion of required service/continuation of active duty in another status. 5. A third DD Form 214 shows the applicant was again ordered to active duty in an AGR status on 2 February 2005. 6. State of North Carolina, Joint Force Headquarters Orders 006-853, dated 6 January 2009 promoted the applicant in rank/grade to Master Sergeant (MSG)/E-8 effective 1 January 2009. 7. State of North Carolina, Joint Force Headquarters Order 099-900, dated 25 April 2019, ordered the applicant to full-time National Guard duty in an AGR status in the rank/grade of MSG/E-8 from 1 October 2019 through 31 January 2020. 8. State of North Carolina Joint Force Headquarters Order 163-886, dated 12 June 2019, released the applicant from active duty and placed him on the retired list effective 31 January 2020 in the retired rank/grade of First Sergeant (1SG)/E-8). 9. The applicant provided a partial OML, which shows he is ranked number 43 in order of merit for promotion to the rank/grade of MSG/E-8 in the AGR in the MOS 92Y, effective 31 January 2020. 10. A DA Form 3349-SG, shows the following: a. The applicant was given the following permanent physical profile ratings: * effective 11 October 2016, he was given a physical profile rating of “2” for lower extremities due to lower back injury/pain * effective 21 June 2019, he was given a physical profile rating of “2” for upper extremities due to elbow, wrist, hand injury/pain bilateral * effective 11 October 2019, he was given a physical profile rating of “2” for physical capacity or stamina due to pauses in breathing during sleep b. His physical profile rating limited him to running at his own pace/distance on non- consecutive days not to exceed 2 miles per run, no guerrilla drill or sports, multiple modified exercises and drills, no standard APFT. 11. The applicant’s DA Form 2166-9-2 (Noncommissioned Officer (NCO) Evaluation Report (Staff Sergeant (SSG) -1SG/MSG) covering the period from 1 June 2019 through 31 January 2020, shows the following: * the applicant’s rank was MSG and his date of rank (DOR) was 1 January 2009 * Part IV (Performance Evaluation, Professionalism, Attributes, and Competencies) part a shows the applicant last passed the APFT on 15 November 2019, due to physical profile * he was rated “Far Exceeded Standard” in every category d- h (Presence, Intellect, Leads, Develops, Achieves) of Part IV and Rater Overall Performance * his Senior Rater rated him as “Highly Qualified” 12. The applicant was retired due to length of service on 31 January 2020. His DD Form 214 covering the period from 2 January 2005 through 31 January 2020 shows the following: * he was credited with 14 years, 11 months, and 29 days of net active service this period, 8 years 8 months, and 16 days of total prior active service, and 9 years, 2 days of total prior inactive service * his rank/grade is shown as MSG/E-8 with a DOR of 1 January 2009 * item 18 (Remarks) shows “retired list grade [rank]1SG//discharged from enlisted status in the retired grade [rank]1SG and placed on retired list as indicated in retirement orders” 13. The applicant’s National Guard Bureau Form 22 ( National Guard Report of Separation and Record of Service) shows the following: * the applicant was retired due to 20-years of active Federal service, sufficient for regular retirement, effective 31 January 2020 * his rank/grade is shown as MSG/E-8 with a DOR of 1 January 2009 * he completed 32 years, 8 months, and 17 days of net ARNG service * his military education included Sergeant Major Course, 2 weeks, November 2016 * item 18 (Remarks) show his retired list grade [rank] of 1SG//discharged in enlisted status in the grade [rank] of 1SG 14. North Carolina ARNG Army Element Joint Force Headquarters Order 0000185074.00, dated 4 February 2020, transferred the applicant to the Retired Reserve effective 1 February 2020 in the rank of 1SG. 15. The applicant’s available service records period do not show: * he was issued a permanent physical profile rating higher than “2” * he suffered from a medical condition, physical or mental, that affected his ability to perform the duties required by his MOS and/or grade or rendered him unfit for military service * he was diagnosed with a medical condition that warranted his entry into the Army Physical Disability Evaluation System (PDES) * he was diagnosed with a condition that failed retention standards and/or was unfitting 16. There are no orders in the applicant’s available records reflecting he was promoted to the rank/grade of SGM/E-9. 17. A VA letter, dated 24 March 2022, shows the applicant was considered to be totally and permanently disabled due to his service-connected disabilities with a combined service-connected evaluation of 100 percent effective 1 February 2020. 18. An undated eBenefits printout, presumably pertaining to the applicant shows he has a combined disability rating of 100 percent for the following service-connected disabilities effective 1 February 2020: * scar, status post lumbar spine repair, 0 percent * erectile dysfunction, 0 percent * left ankle deltoid ligament sprain, 10 percent * status post lumbar repair with lumbosacral and thoracic strain, 10 percent * diverticulosis with gastroesophageal reflux disease, 10 percent * psoriasis, 0 percent * left upper extremity cubital tunnel syndrome, 10 percent * bilateral plantar fasciitis, 30 percent * left hip strain with limitation of extension, 10 percent * sleep apnea with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), 50 percent * bilateral hearing loss, 0 percent * left knee strain * left shoulder strain and rotator cuff tendonitis, 20 percent * tinnitus (bilateral), 10 percent * tension headaches, 0 percent * bilateral inguinal hernia, 0 percent * right knee strain, 10 percent * left shin splints, not service-connected * right lower extremity radiculopathy, not service-connected * agoraphobia, not service-connected * anxiety, not service-connected * left lower extremity radiculopathy, not service-connected * right leg shin splints, not service-connected 19. An SSA letter, dated 24 March 2022, shows the applicant became disabled under their rules on 14 March 2020, and that he is entitled to monthly disability benefits. 20. 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 does not have authority or responsibility for determining physical fitness for military service. The VA may compensate the individual for loss of civilian employability. 21. Title 38, USC, 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. 22. Title 38, CFR, 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. 23. MEDICAL REVIEW: a. The Army Review Boards Agency (ARBA) Medical Advisor was asked to review this case. Documentation reviewed included the applicant’s ABCMR application and accompanying documentation, the military electronic medical record (AHLTA), the VA electronic medical record (JLV), the electronic Physical Evaluation Board (ePEB), the Medical Electronic Data Care History and Readiness Tracking (MEDCHART) application, and the Interactive Personnel Electronic Records Management System (iPERMS). The ARBA Medical Advisor made the following findings and recommendations: b. The applicant is applying to the ABCMR requesting his length of service retirement be changed to a medical retirement, so in essence, a referral to the Disability Evaluation System (DES). He states: “Disability determination was not conducted until after regular retirement paperwork was submitted and was not advised to submit for medical retirement. Less than 12 months processing for retirement, I was advised just to retire as I had more than 30+ years of service and the medical route would have extended the process up to two additional years. I should have been sent to a MEB/PEB and placed on the TDRL/PDRL as a result of the overwhelming medical evidence provided and processed prior to retirement. My retirement decision came when my inability to perform MOS functions of active service due to physical disabilities. Prior to retirement, I was on a permanent profile for two events of the APFT from disabilities of PTSD, two back surgeries, and sleep apnea. Decreasing physical abilities prevented me from performing the physical requirements of my 13 series and 92 series military occupational services to the extent that I was medically prescribed, due to physical profiles, a veridesk because of the limitations of sitting and standing for long periods of time.” c. The Record of Proceedings details the applicant’s military service and the circumstances of the case. His most recent DD 214 shows the former Guardsman served on active duty as a member of the Active Guard Reserve (AGR) from 2 February 2005 thru 31 January 2020. He received an honorable discharge under the separation authority of paragraphs 6-4 (Mandatory release) and 6-6 (Involuntary release from FTNGD and separation from the ARNG) of NGR 600-5, The Active Guard Reserve (AGR) Program Title 32, Full Time National Guard Duty (FTNGD) Management (21 September 2015). The narrative reason for separation (block 28 of the DD 214) states “Sufficient service for Retirement.” d. His National Guard Report of Separation and Record of Service (NGB From 22) shows he enlisted in the Army National Guard on 14 May 1987 and was discharged from the North Carolina Army National Guard (NCARNG) effective 31 January 2020 under authority provided in paragraphs 6-4 and 6-6 of NGR 600-5. It shows 32 years, 8 months, and 17 days of total service for retired pay. e. The applicant was placed on a non-duty limiting parament profile for low back pain/injury on 11 October 2016, for bilateral forearm pain/injury on 21 June 2019, and for obstructive sleep apnea on 11 October 2019. The applicant was marked as capable of performing all the functional activities required of all Soldiers, including live in an austere environment. The profile simply allowed the applicant to perform an alternate aerobic event for his Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) and he did not have to perform the sit-up or push-up events. f. No medical documentation was submitted with the application and there are just two encounters in AHLTA, both of which are administrative. g. Orders published by Joint Force Headquarter of the North Carolina Nation Guard on 13 June 2019 show the applicant was to be discharged and place on the retired list effective 31 January 2020. h. The DES compensates Soldiers when their career is terminated prior to retirement due to a service incurred medical condition. Paragraph 1-1b of AR 635–40, Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation (19 January 2017) states a purpose of the DES is to: “Provide benefits for eligible Soldiers whose military Service is terminated because of a service-connected disability.” i. There is no probative evidence the applicant had any duty incurred medical condition which would have failed the medical retention standards of chapter 3 of AR 40-501, Standards of Medical Fitness, prior to his length of service retirement. Thus, there was no cause for referral to the Disability Evaluation System. Furthermore, there is no evidence that any medical condition prevented the applicant from being able to reasonably perform the duties of his office, grade, rank, or rating prior to his discharge. j. Even had the applicant been referred for the conditions profiled in in 2019, he would almost certainly have been found fit by presumption. Paragraph 5-5 of AR 635– 40, Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation (19 January 2017): “5–5. Presumption of fitness The DES compensates disabilities when they cause or contribute to career termination. Servicemembers who are pending retirement at the time they are referred for disability evaluation are presumed fit for military Service as set forth below.” k. When a Service Member is referred to the DES during the 12-month presumptive period, the member is found fit by presumption because the medical condition(s) did not cause or contribute to their career termination and so are non-compensable. For the Army, the date of referral to the DES is the date the Soldier’s profile is signed by the approval authority. In this case the date of referral was 7 May 2018 and was less than 2 months before his mandatory retirement for length of Service. l. Paragraph 5-5b of 635-40 defines the presumptive period: m. Presumptive period. The PEB will presume Soldiers to be pending retirement when the Soldier’s date of referral to the DES is after any of the circumstances listed below. (1) The Soldier’s request for voluntary retirement has been approved. Revocation of voluntary retirement orders for purposes of referral into the DES does not negate application. (2) An officer has been approved for selective early retirement. (3) An officer is within 12 months of mandatory retirement due to age or length of service. (4) An officer or enlisted is within 12 months of mandatory removal date and will be retirement eligible. (5) An enlisted member is within 12 months of their RCP or expiration of term of service and will be eligible for regular retirement. (6) An RC member is within 12 months of mandatory removal date from active status and qualifies for a 20-year letter at the time of referral to the DES. (7) The Soldier is a retiree recall, to include those who transferred to the Retired Reserve, with eligibility to draw retired pay upon reaching the age prescribed by statute unless the recalled retiree incurred or aggravated the medical condition while on their current active-duty orders and overcomes the presumption of fitness. (8) The Soldier has been approved for retirement under a Temporary Early Retirement Authority so long as the Army program guidance allows Soldiers to accept such offer when they require or are pending DES evaluation, or otherwise before the outcome of the DES is known. n. In these cases, the Service Member is retirement eligible for length of Service and is within 12 months of retirement, and so their medical condition(s) did not cause or contribute to career termination and are therefore not compensable. The Service Member will go on to receive retirement pay when eligible. o. There are three circumstances in which a medical condition may overcome the presumption of fitness. Paragraph 5d of AR 635-40: Overcoming the presumption of fitness rule. Soldiers may overcome this presumption by presenting a preponderance of evidence that they are unfit for military Service. The presumption of fitness rule may be overcome (rebutted) when— (1) Within the presumptive period an illness or injury occurs that would prevent the Soldier from performing further duty if they were not retiring or not a retiree recall. (2) Within the presumptive period a serious deterioration of a previously diagnosed condition, to include a chronic condition, occurs and the deterioration would preclude further duty if the Soldier were not retiring or not a retiree recall. (3) The condition for which the Soldier is referred is a chronic condition and a preponderance of evidence establishes that the Soldier was not performing duties befitting the Soldier’s office, grade, rank, or military occupational specialty (MOS) before entering the presumptive period. The ability to perform further duty is not a consideration. (For retiree recalls, this overcoming circumstance pertains to whether the Soldier was performing befitting duties before initially retiring.) p. Again, there is no probative evidence the applicant had a medical condition(s) which would have overcome the presumption of fitness. On his final NCO Evaluation Report with a thru date of 31 January 2020, he was marked as “Far Exceeded Standard” for all attributes/competencies, and his senior rater opined: “MSG {Applicant} is among the top 10% of Senior NCOs. His strong experience in Personnel and Operations, in addition to Logistics, makes him a candidate for multiple key assignments at the highest echelons. Promote to Sergeant Major ahead of peers.” q. Review of his records in JLV shows he has been awarded numerous VA service- connected disability ratings. However, the DES compensates an individual only for service incurred condition(s) which have been determined to disqualify him or her from further military service. The DES has neither the role nor the authority to compensate service members for anticipated future severity or potential complications of conditions which were incurred or permanently aggravated during their military service; or which did not cause or contribute to the termination of their military career. These roles and authority were granted by Congress to the Department of Veterans Affairs and are executed under a different set of laws. r. Given no evidence of error or injustice, it is the opinion of the Agency Medical Advisor that a referral of his case to the DES is unwarranted. BOARD DISCUSSION: 1. After reviewing the application, all supporting documents, and the evidence found within the military record, the Board found that relief was not warranted. The Board carefully considered the applicant's record of service, documents submitted in support of the petition and executed a comprehensive and standard review based on law, policy and regulation. Upon review of the applicant’s petition, available military records and the medical review the Board concurred with the advising official finding that a referral of his case to the Disability Evaluation System (DES) is not warranted. During deliberation, the Board found no probative evidence the applicant had a medical condition(s) which would have overcome the presumption of fitness. The Board determined there is insufficient evidence to support the applicant’s contentions for referral to DES. 2. In addition, the Board determined his record is absent evidence that shows he was promoted to rank/grade of sergeant major (SGM)/E-9 nor does the record show the applicant was in a promotable status prior to his discharge. Therefore, the Board determined the applicant did not meet the criteria for promotion or DES referral and relief was denied. 3. The Board determined DES compensates an individual only for service incurred condition(s) which have been determined to disqualify him or her from further military service. The DES has neither the role nor the authority to compensate service members for anticipated future severity or potential complications of conditions which were incurred or permanently aggravated during their military service; or which did not cause or contribute to the termination of their military career. These roles and authority were granted by Congress to the Department of Veterans Affairs and are executed under a different set of laws. 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 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. 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 (Disability 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 a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB); when they receive a permanent medical profile rating of 3 or 4 in any factor and are referred by an Military Occupational Specialty (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 Physical Evaluation Board (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. 3. Army Regulation 635-40 establishes the Army Disability Evaluation System and sets forth policies, responsibilities, and procedures that apply in determining whether a Soldier is unfit because of physical disability to reasonably perform the duties of his office, grade, rank, or rating. 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. a. Disability compensation is not an entitlement acquired by reason of service- incurred illness or injury; rather, it 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 military service. b. Soldiers who sustain or aggravate physically-unfitting disabilities must meet the following line-of-duty criteria to be eligible to receive retirement and severance pay benefits: (1) The disability must have been incurred or aggravated while the Soldier was entitled to basic pay or as the proximate cause of performing active duty or inactive duty training. (2) The disability must not have resulted from the Soldier's intentional misconduct or willful neglect and must not have been incurred during a period of unauthorized absence. 4. Army Regulation 40-501 provides information on medical fitness standards for induction, enlistment, appointment, retention, and related policies and procedures. Soldiers with conditions listed in chapter 3 who do not meet the required medical standards will be evaluated by an MEB and will be referred to a PEB as defined in Army Regulation 635–40 with the following caveats: a. U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) or Army National Guard (ARNG) Soldiers not on active duty, whose medical condition was not incurred or aggravated during an active duty period, will be processed in accordance with chapter 9 and chapter 10 of this regulation. b. Reserve Component Soldiers pending separation for In the Line of Duty injuries or illnesses will be processed in accordance with Army Regulation 40-400 (Patient Administration) and Army Regulation 635-40. c. Normally, Reserve Component Soldiers who do not meet the fitness standards set by chapter 3 will be transferred to the Retired Reserve per Army Regulation 140–10 (USAR Assignments, Attachments, Details, and Transfers) or discharged from the Reserve Component per Army Regulation 135–175 (Separation of Officers), Army Regulation 135–178 (ARNG and Reserve Enlisted Administrative Separations), or other applicable Reserve Component regulation. They will be transferred to the Retired Reserve only if eligible and if they apply for it. d. Reserve Component Soldiers who do not meet medical retention standards may request continuance in an active USAR status. In such cases, a medical impairment incurred in either military or civilian status will be acceptable; it need not have been incurred only in the line of duty. Reserve Component Soldiers with non-duty related medical conditions who are pending separation for not meeting the medical retention standards of chapter 3 may request referral to a PEB for a determination of fitness in accordance with paragraph 9–12. 5. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1201, provides for the physical disability retirement of a member who has at least 20 years of service or a disability rating of at least 30 percent. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1203, provides for the physical disability separation of a member who has less than 20 years of service and a disability rating of less than 30 percent. 6. Army Regulation 600-8-19 (Enlisted Promotions and Reductions), in effect at the time, prescribes policies and procedures governing promotion and reduction of Army enlisted personnel. It states promotion to the rank/grade of sergeant major/E-9 will be announced in promotion orders. 7. 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. 8. 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. 9. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1556 requires the Secretary of the Army to ensure that an applicant seeking corrective action by the Army Review Boards Agency (ARBA) be provided with a copy of any correspondence and communications (including summaries of verbal communications) to or from the Agency with anyone outside the Agency that directly pertains to or has material effect on the applicant's case, except as authorized by statute. ARBA medical advisory opinions and reviews are authored by ARBA civilian and military medical and behavioral health professionals and are therefore internal agency work product. Accordingly, ARBA does not routinely provide copies of ARBA Medical Office recommendations, opinions (including advisory opinions), and reviews to Army Board for Correction of Military Records applicants (and/or their counsel) prior to adjudication. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20220005830 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1