Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001064790C070421
Original file (2001064790C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


         IN THE CASE OF:
        


         BOARD DATE: 16 April 2002
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2001064790

         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.

Mr. Carl W. S. Chun Director
Mr. Jessie B. Strickland Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:

Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright Chairperson
Ms. Melinda M. Darby Member
Mr. John T. Meixell Member

         The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date. 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 correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

         The Board considered the following evidence:

         Exhibit A - Application for correction of military
records
         Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
         advisory opinion, if any)


APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that her discharge be voided and that she be reinstated to active duty in the pay grade of E-5.

APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that her command discharged her based on their personal feelings rather than the facts. As a result, she was unjustly reduced in grade and was discharged from the service. In support of her application she submits a memorandum for record explaining her position and provides additional supporting documents in the form of police reports, medical documents and statements relating to her situation at the time.

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

She initially enlisted on 10 September 1991 and served until she was honorably released from active duty in the pay grade of E-4 on 12 July 1995, due to reduction in force. She had served 3 years, 10 months and 3 days of total active service.

She again enlisted in Phoenix, Arizona, on 17 January 1997, for a period of 4 years, training as a microwave system operator – repairer, and assignment to Fort Drum, New York. She was promoted to the pay grade of E-5 on 1 August 1998.

On 26 October 2000, while stationed in the Netherlands, the applicant had a physical altercation with the wife of a soldier she (the applicant) was having a sexual affair with and involved the soldier’s wife assaulting the applicant. At the time, the applicant was allegedly pregnant with the soldier’s child and had a miscarriage the next day. Both she (the applicant) and the soldier subsequently admitted to the adulterous affair.

On 6 February 2001, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against the applicant for wrongfully engaging in sexual intercourse with a married man (a staff sergeant) during the period of 30 August to 30 October 2000. Her punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-4 (suspended until 4 August 2001), a forfeiture of pay and extra duty. She did not appeal the punishment and the imposing commander directed that the Record of Proceedings of NJP (DA Form 2627) be filed on the restricted fiche of her Official Military Personnel File (OMPF).

On 9 May 2001, the applicant was involved in an automobile accident in which she drove into a light pole and suffered a concussion. She was transported to a hospital and was cited for failure to maintain control of a vehicle.

She then departed the hospital without being released, after being told she was being transferred to a psychiatric section for evaluation and her commander was notified. He in turn notified the military police and they were at her quarters when she arrived. When the commander requested that the matter be discussed inside of the applicant’s quarters, she became defiant and sat on the ground. She later assaulted the commissioned officer, was restrained and taken to a medical facility for evaluation.

On 5 June 2001, the imposing commander vacated the suspended punishment and reduced her to the pay grade of E-4. He cited as the basis for his action that the applicant was disrespectful towards a commissioned officer, she displayed disorderly conduct of a nature to bring discredit on the Armed Forces and for failure to maintain control of a vehicle which resulted in a traffic accident.

The facts and circumstances surrounding the administrative discharge are not present in the available records. However, her records do contain a duly constituted report of separation (DD Form 214) signed by the applicant. It shows that she was honorably discharged on 2 August 2001, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-18, due to a physical condition not a disability. She had served 4 years, 6 months and 16 days of active service during her current enlistment and was authorized one-half separation pay.

Army Regulation 635-200 serves as the authority for enlisted separation. Paragraph 5-18 (Other Designated Physical or Mental Conditions) provides that commanders may approve separation under this paragraph on the basis of other physical or mental conditions not amounting to physical disability (AR 635-40), and excluding conditions appropriate for separation processing under paragraph 5-11 or 5-13, that potentially interfere with assignment to or performance of duty. Such conditions may include, but are not limited to, chronic airsickness or seasickness, enuresis, sleepwalking, dyslexia, severe nightmares, claustrophobia, and other disorders manifesting disturbances of perception, thinking, emotional control or behavior sufficiently severe that the soldier’s ability to effectively perform military duties is significantly impaired. When a commander determines that a soldier has a physical or mental condition that potentially interferes with assignment to or performance of duty, the commander will refer the soldier for a medical examination and/or mental status evaluation in accordance with Army Regulation 40-501. A recommendation for separation must be supported by documentation confirming the existence of the physical or mental condition.

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. Inasmuch as the Board does not have the benefit of reviewing the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s administrative discharge, the Board must presume, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, that her discharge was accomplished in accordance with the applicable regulations, with no violations of any of her rights.

2. Accordingly, her discharge is commensurate with the available facts in her case and her overall record of service.

3. While the applicant has provided some documents to support her application, without having the benefit of reviewing the administrative discharge proceedings in her case, they serve only to represent her perspective and does not serve as a basis to show that her discharge was in error or unjust.

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

___md __ __jm ____ ___inw__ DENY APPLICATION



                  Carl W. S. Chun
                  Director, Army Board for Correction
of Military Records




INDEX

CASE ID AR2001064790
SUFFIX
RECON YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED 2002/04/16
TYPE OF DISCHARGE HD
DATE OF DISCHARGE 2001/08/02
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY AR635-200/ 5-18
DISCHARGE REASON Phy condition not a disability
BOARD DECISION DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1. 360 144.0000/adm disc
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001065973C070421

    Original file (2001065973C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 14 October 1988, the applicant’s commander initiated separation action on the applicant under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13, Personality Disorder. She requested consideration of her case by an administrative separation board, requested personal appearance before such a board, requested representation by counsel, and submitted a statement in...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002079062C070215

    Original file (2002079062C070215.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, a sergeant and members of her chain of command who were not present at the accident made statements to medical personnel that she had attempted suicide before she ever arrived at the emergency room. The separation packet submitted by the applicant in this request for reconsideration confirms that on 12 June 2001, her unit commander notified her that separation action was being initiated against her for a physical or mental condition, not a disability. The separation packet...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120019988

    Original file (20120019988.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant provides: * DD Form 214 Worksheet (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) * 36 pages of service medical records * Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical records and rating decisions CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The DD Form 214 she was issued at the time shows she was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), paragraph 5-17, by reason of a physical condition, not a...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120003169

    Original file (20120003169.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 2 December 2009, the applicant's commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate action to separate her under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5, paragraph 5-17, Other Designated Physical or Mental Conditions, due to a diagnosis of an adjustment disorder with depressed mood, with an honorable discharge. On 3 December 2009, the applicant's commander recommended that the applicant be separated for Other Designated Physical or Mental Conditions under the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130005677

    Original file (20130005677.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    d. He noted that Personality Disorders are disqualifying in accordance with Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Separations), chapter 5 (Separation for the Convenience of the Government), paragraph 5-13 (Personality Disorder). The applicant contends that the separation authority, narrative reason for her separation, and SPD and RE codes should be corrected to show she was medically discharged or retired because the VA ganted her a 100% disability rating based on...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 200165862

    Original file (200165862.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02845

    Original file (BC 2013 02845.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C. The Medical Consultant recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice to warrant changing the applicant’s narrative reason for separation. However, she did disclose the name of the individual in order that treatment of any medical condition could be provided to them both. However, in the absence of service clinical evidence of a diagnosable, compensable, and unfitting mental disorder during the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140003823

    Original file (20140003823.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation) governs the evaluation of physical fitness of Soldiers who may be unfit to perform their military duties because of physical disability. While she may have received medical treatment for various reasons throughout her service, the evidence of record does not show and she has not provided any evidence that shows...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100018089

    Original file (20100018089.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Medical board and Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-17, procedures were discussed with the applicant and all concerned and the applicant was in agreement that a discharge under paragraph 5-17 was the route she wanted to take. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-17, provides for the separation of Soldiers who have a physical or mental condition that potentially interferes with assignment to or performance of duty; however, the physical or mental condition does not amount to a disability...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001065862C070421

    Original file (2001065862C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 19 November 1997 the applicant reported to medical personnel that she experienced migraines one to three times per month and on that particular day (19 November) she had taken medication for her migraine and was requesting that she be assigned to her quarters for the day. The VA's decision to grant the applicant a 50 percent disability rating for her headaches was based on information contained in the applicant's MEB and a 6 August 1998 examination in which the applicant stated that "the...