APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That his record be corrected to show that his discharge was based on physical disability.

APPLICANT STATES:  That, in effect, he did not serve unsatisfactorily, but had a medical problem with his hand.

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

On 15 February 1991, he enlisted in the Regular Army, in pay grade E-4.

On 24 March 1991, the applicant fractured his right ring finger.

On 5 August 1992, Medical Board (MEBD) Proceedings indicated he had SP open reduction internal fixation of a phalangeal fracture, right ring finger, PO fibrosis with secondary limitation of motion.  This case was referred to a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB).

On 8 August 1991, the applicant concurred with the MEBD finding and recommendation.

On 14 August 1991, PEB Proceedings found the applicant fit for duty.

On 21 August 1991, the applicant indicated that he did not concur with the PEB, but he did not demand a formal PEB.

On 29 October 1991, the PEB adhered to their original decision.

On 16 November 1991, the unit commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate action to separate him under Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 13-2, for unsatisfactory performance, based on his lack of motivation to meet the required standards to graduate from basic training and for his inability to pass the Army Physical Fitness Test.

On 18 November 1991, the applicant waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board and representation by legal counsel.  He indicated his desire not to have a separation physical examination.

On 12 December 1991, the appropriate separation authority approved his separation and directed issuance of an Honorable Discharge Certificate.

On 18 December 1991, he was honorably discharged, in pay grade E-4, under the above cited regulation.  His Report of Separation indicates he had 10 months and 4 days of creditable service.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 13 contains the policy and outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unsatisfactory performance, and provides, in pertinent part, that commanders will separate a member under this chapter when, in the commander’s judgment, the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory soldier and that the circumstances forming the basis for initiation of separation proceedings will continue or recur.  The characterization of service of soldiers separated because of unsatisfactory performance will be characterized as honorable or under honorable conditions as warranted by their military record.

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

1.  In order to justify correction of a military record, the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.

2.  The applicant’s allegation that his unsatisfactory performance was solely because of his physical disability is unsupported by the evidence of record.

3.  The evidence shows that the principal reason for the commander’s recommendation for separation was clearly lack of motivation to meet the required standard to graduate basis training.

4.  The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of the request.

5.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant’s request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

                       GRANT          

                       GRANT FORMAL HEARING

                       DENY APPLICATION




						Karl F. Schneider
						Acting Director