Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
Ms. Deyon D. Battle | Analyst |
Mr. John N. Slone | Chairperson | |
Mr. Lester Echols | Member | |
Mr. Ronald E. Blakely | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his uncharacterized discharge be changed to a medical discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: That, although he had persistent medical problems and was in and out of the hospital, he was told that he could only get an uncharacterized discharge because of the length of his service. In support of his application he submits a letter dated 17 April 1996, from the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) that shows he was awarded a 10 percent service connected disability rating for impairment of femur.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 6 May 1994, he enlisted in the Army for 3 years in the pay grade of E-4.
On 9 August 1994, the applicant was counseled for being absent from his place of duty and for going to the Judge Advocate General without going through his chain of command. He was informed that he would receive an Article 15 for his actions and that he should use his chain of command in the future.
The applicant underwent a fit for duty examination on 22 August 1994 and he was determined to be unable to musculoskeletally adapt to an extremely active lifestyle. The physician recommended that the applicant be administratively discharged.
On 30 August 1994, he was recommended for separation in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 11 based on entry level performance and conduct. The commander stated that the applicant had failed to adhere to standards expected of initial entry training soldier. The commander further stated that the applicant had failed to comply with directives from his chain of command on more than one occasion and did not display any motivation in group activities. He continued by stating that the applicant continually displayed an overall poor attitude and lack of discipline and that he had been on a medical profile since 22 June 1994 because he had been unable to participate in the majority of training.
The applicant was counseled again on 1 September 1994. He was informed that he was being recommended for an entry level separation as a result of his performance and medical status.
On 6 September 1994, the applicant was notified that action to eliminate him from the Army had been initiated. He acknowledged receipt of the notification on 7 September 1994 and, after consulting with counsel, he waived his rights and he opted not to submit a statement in his own behalf.
The appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge on 12 September 1994. Accordingly, on 15 September 1994, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 11 based on entry level performance and conduct. He had completed 4 months and 10 days of total active service and the character of his service was uncharacterized.
On 17 April 1996, the DVA awarded a 10 percent service connected disability rating for impairment of femur.
On 17 June 1998, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for a recharacterization of his discharge.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 11, of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, for the separation of personnel because of unsatisfactory performance or conduct (or both) while in an entry level status. The policy applies to individuals who have demonstrated that they are not qualified for retention because they cannot meet the minimum standards prescribed for successful completion of training because they lack the aptitude, ability motivation or self-discipline for military service, or that they have demonstrated characteristics not compatible with satisfactory continued service.
Army Regulation 635-5-1, in effect at the time, prescribed the narrative reasons and regulatory authority for separation from active duty. It stated, in pertinent part, that individuals involuntarily separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 11, would be issued a narrative reason for separation of "Entry level status performance and conduct”.
Title 38, United States Code, sections 310 and 331, permits the VA to award compensation for a medical condition which was incurred in or aggravated by active military service. The VA, however, is not required by law to determine medical unfitness for further military service. The VA, in accordance with its own policies and regulations, awards compensation solely on the basis that a medical condition exists and that said medical condition reduces or impairs the social or industrial adaptability of the individual concerned. 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.
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. The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors, which would tend to jeopardize his rights.
2. The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefor were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.
3. The fact that the VA, in its discretion, has awarded the applicant a disability rating is a prerogative exercised within the policies of that agency. It does not, in itself, establish physical unfitness for Department of the Army purposes. He clearly failed to adhere to standards expected of an initial entry training soldier. Therefore, there was no basis for processing the applicant for discharge through medical channels.
4. 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 this requirement.
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
__js_____ ___reb__ ___le____ DENY APPLICATION
CASE ID | AR2001057531 |
SUFFIX | |
RECON | YYYYMMDD |
DATE BOARDED | 2001/09/25 |
TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UNCHAR |
DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19940915 |
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200 |
DISCHARGE REASON | 516 |
BOARD DECISION | DENY |
REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
ISSUES 1. 516 | 144.2900 |
2. | |
3. | |
4. | |
5. | |
6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001061570C070421
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. The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 27 November 1996, he was again counseled in regards to his having missed too much training, his refusal of FTU (First Training Unit) or restart, and lack of motivation or inability to adapt to the military.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110020045
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. c. Paragraph 5-17 provides that Soldiers may be separated for mental conditions not amounting to disability under Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation) that potentially interfere with assignment to or performance of duty. A VA service-connected disability rating does not establish entitlement to discharge from the Army for medical reasons.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9605765C070209
On 5 December 1994 the applicant stated that he understood that he was not required to undergo a medical examination for separation, however he could request one. The applicant did not have any medically unfitting disability which required physical disability processing. The Army must find unfitness for duty at the time of separation before a member may be medically retired or separated.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | AR20060016700C071029
The appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge on 17 October 1991 and he directed the issuance of an entry level separation with uncharacterized service. Accordingly on 22 October 1991, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 11, due to entry level performance and conduct. It further states that the character of service for members separated under the provisions of this chapter will be uncharacterized.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140001711
The applicant requests, in effect, that Item 24 (Character of Service) on his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be changed from an uncharacterized discharge to an honorable discharge. It stated that a DD Form 214 would be prepared for all personnel at the time of their retirement, discharge or release from Active Army. The evidence shows he was discharged from active duty on 28 February 1994 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 11, with...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004103221C070208
The Rating Decision noted that a 40 percent rating (for the applicant's hip condition) was granted because the physical examination showed he could flex his hip only 10 degrees. It is also noted that the Army rated the applicant's knee condition in May 1994 at 10 percent whereas the VA, even after his numerous complaints of knee problems after the PEB, initially awarded a zero percent rating for his knee condition. There is no evidence that the applicant's ankle condition or injury to his...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003087825C070212
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: He informed the applicant that following her father's stroke, she had elected to seek a hardship discharge for hardship reasons and failed to provide the necessary legal documentation to determine the custody of her three children, which led to the failure of her request for a hardship discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140015881
The applicant requests correction of his records to show he was: * medically discharged under honorable conditions instead of discharged with an uncharacterized discharge by reason of personality disorder * discharged on 5 October 1989 instead of 26 September 1989 2. Because this mental status evaluation determined he was diagnosed with a personality disorder that affected his ability to function effectively in a military environment, his chain of command initiated separation action against...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002076835C070215
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. The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show:
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120020995
A drill instructor stepped on his leg to flatten it and the applicant told him the leg was injured and hurt. e. While in AIT, he had another leg injury when a tire fell on his leg. The evidence of record confirms that on 16 December 1982 an EPSBD found the applicant's condition of left thigh pain existed prior to his entry into military service and recommended he be discharged for failing to meet medical procurement standards.