APPLICANT REQUESTS: Reconsideration of his request for upgrading of his separation to honorable, which was denied by this Board on 19 July 1995.
APPLICANT STATES: That he was punished, but not one attempt to treat him for his problems.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: Incorporated herein by reference are military records which are summarized in a memorandum presented before this Board on 19 July 1995 (COPY ATTACHED).
The applicant provides an unsigned listing of his social, family, school, military, employment, marital, and mental history which was completed by a social worker on his behalf.
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. At the time of the applicantÂ’s separation, a Report of Psychiatric Examination and a physical examination, respectively, cleared the applicant for separation. There were no medically unfitting conditions noted.
3. The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.
4. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicants request.
DETERMINATION: The original decision by this Board is reaffirmed.
BOARD VOTE:
GRANT
GRANT FORMAL HEARING
DENY APPLICATION
Karl F. Schneider
Acting Director
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058306C070421
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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058309C070421
In the right knee he exhibited the same degree of crepitation and lateral subluxation without pain which was present in the left knee. X-rays were taken of his left knee. Consequently, due to the two concepts involved, an individual’s medical condition, although not considered medically unfitting for military service at the time of processing for separation, discharge or retirement, may be sufficient to qualify the individual for VA benefits based on an evaluation by that agency.The...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040000265C070208
The applicant requests physical disability retirement with a 100 percent disability rating. In his 19 February 2004 letter to the Army Chief of Staff the applicant states that he should be granted a 100 percent service connected disability rating effective 1 June 1994, the date he was released from active duty. His service medical records do not indicate any medical condition incurred while entitled to receive basic pay which was so severe as to render the applicant medically unfit for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002075116C070403
COUNSEL CONTENDS : That the applicant has submitted VA records showing he was assigned a 20 percent rating for a left knee condition and a 10 percent rating for a left thumb condition. The VA apparently initially awarded the applicant a 10 percent disability rating for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction of his left knee and a zero percent disability rating for residuals of his left thumb injury. Title 10, U. S. Code, section 1203, provides for the physical disability separation of a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130004391
On 11 November 1992, the 102nd ARCOM Command Surgeon provided a medical review which shows the applicant: * had not attended inactive duty training (IDT) since June 1992 * was approved for Social Security disability * was diagnosed with active paranoid schizophrenia with active hallucinations * was receiving $800 per month from the VA * met the criteria of having a psychotic condition with gross impairment in reality testing, resulting in interference with duty or social adjustment, a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100013827
The applicant requests that his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be corrected to show his service is characterized as honorable versus "uncharacterized." On 18 January 1995, the applicant's immediate commander initiated separation action against the applicant in accordance with chapter 11 (ELS) of Army Regulation 635-200. Accordingly, the applicant was discharged on 19 January 1995.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050004175C070206
If it appears the Soldier is not medically qualified to perform duty, the medical treatment facility commander will refer the soldier to a MEB. There is no evidence, and the applicant has not provided any, that his medical condition was such that it precluded him from the performance of his military duties. Consequently, the applicant's medical condition, although not considered medically unfitting for military service at the time of processing for separation, discharge or retirement, may...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080018686
The applicant provides handwritten insert sheets that provide a description of the copies of the documents he provides, which include a Form 3822-R (Report of Mental Status Evaluation), dated 13 December 1976; DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) with an effective date of 25 August 1978; FORSCOM Form 248-R (Statement of Acceptance), dated 25 August 1978; DA Form 3686 (Leave and Earnings Statement), period covered 1 - 31 October 1978; Headquarters, First U.S. Army, Fort George...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050008117C070206
He goes on to state that had the military done an MRI and discovered his real problem, he would have been able to complete his enlistment. He also states that his record of service will bear out that he was not an unsatisfactory Soldier, but his medical condition prevented him from passing the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT). As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 040008277C070208
Congress established the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) as the standard under which percentage rating decisions are to be made for disabled military personnel. The medical evidence of record supports the determination that the applicant's unfitting condition was properly diagnosed and rated at the time of his discharge. The applicant was discharged because of his physical disability, mechanical low back pain, and received a 10 percent disability rating.