MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


         IN THE CASE OF:



         BOARD DATE: 01 JULY 2003
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2003083384

         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
Ms. Deborah L. Brantley		Senior Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:

Mr. Ted S. Kanamine		Chairperson
Mr. Melvin H. Meyer		Member
Ms. Karen Y. Fletcher		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, disability retirement, separation in pay grade E-3, separation pay, access to military base facilities, entitlement to the GI Bill, and that the term "non-productive" and her lost time be expunged from her separation document.

APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that she was persuaded to enlist in January 1981 and told she would immediately commence basic training. She states that she was looking forward to being a good soldier but hurt her back while in processing. She states that she hurt her back lifting "a steel bed to make it, and move it from the wall." She notes she was taken to the medical facility, given medication and placed on bed rest for 10 days. She states that the pain was "really out of control" and that when she went to see the doctor again he prescribed different pain medication. She states she is unclear what happened next but states she apparently left the base, "went straight to the airport and had suffered an overdose from the medication and it took four men to hold [her] down until the emergency medical vehicle could come and take [her] to the hospital.

The applicant states she was hospitalized for 5 day but has no memory of the entire incident until she was being released from the hospital. She states that she was told by her doctor that her back injury "should put me out on a medical discharge…." However, when she returned to her unit she went to see her commander "to face the punishment that [she] knew [she] was going to have to face." The commander, however, was so impressed by her taking responsibility for her actions "even though [she] had no knowledge of it" that the commander concluded that an "Article 15 would be the proper punishment." She states that after that she moved out with her group to the basic training area and in spite of suffering from a lot of pain she attempted to do what was expected of her. She notes she was upset and angry that she "could not do what [she] really loved doing" but was ultimately told she was being sent home. She states that only thing that was "non-productive" was her back and that during the period of service noted as lost time on her separation document, she was actually in the hospital.

She states that when it came time for her to leave she was ordered to attend reserve meetings once a month and did not receive a "discharge paper" or a medical discharge. She states she went home empty handed "just like [she] arrived in the Army all except for a bad back." She states she still has problems with her back.

She states that she enlisted for 4 years, served from January 1981 to 30 June 1981 and that all of her documents have "been changed, doctored or altered to make it look like {she] was in there [the Army] for a short time to keep [her] from receiving any benefits."

In support of her application she submits copies of her enlistment documents, a copy of her separation order from active duty, a copy of her shot record, and copies of two medical treatment statements which have been annotated "for back." Only one of the treatment documents is dated.

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

She enlisted in the United States Army Reserve for a period of 6 years on
27 March 1981. The applicant was nearly 22 years old at the time, had completed 10 years of formal education and received a high school GED (General Education Diploma). Her GT (general technical) score was 71 and only one of her aptitude area scores (clerical) was over 90.

Her original enlistment documents, which she authenticated, are contained in the records that were available to the Board. The enlistment documents the applicant submitted in support of her request to this Board also reflect an enlistment date of 27 March 1981.

Orders issued on 27 March 1981 at the Armed Forces Examining and Entrance Station in Shreveport, Louisiana indicated that the applicant was to return to that agency on 15 May 1981 to complete processing and to commence active duty for training.

The applicant entered active duty on 15 May 1981 and assigned to Fort Jackson, South Carolina.

On 22 May 1981 her status was changed from PDY (present for duty) to AWOL (absent without leave). She returned to military control at 2250 hours on 29 May 1981.

On 11 June 1981 the applicant was punished under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice for being absent without leave from 1630 hours on
22 May 1981 until 2250 hours on 29 May 1981 and for intentionally injuring herself on 3 June 1981 by "misusing prescriptions medication…." The applicant did not request an open hearing and presented matters in her defense in person. Her punishment included forfeiture of $117.00 for one month. She did not appeal the action and declined to consult with legal counsel.

On 12 June 1981 she was transferred from the reception station at Fort Jackson to Company B, 7^th Battalion to commence basic training."

A 16 June 1981 "TDP (Trainee Discharge Program) counseling statement notes that the applicant platoon sergeant counseled her on 14 and 16 June concerning her problems adjusting to the Army. He notes that on 14 June she appeared depressed and was "constantly complaining about her back" even though the "doctors have told her there is nothing wrong with her." The platoon sergeant indicated that the applicant expressed a desire to get and that "she can't handle the military environment."

Her unit commander indicated in that same counseling statement that he had talked to her on 15 and 16 June and that on 15 June he had informed her that her performance was "very below par, not motivated at all." He noted that she had been complaining about her back "and riding sick call." However, he also noted that her doctors had told "her and us that nothing is wrong with her." She indicated that she "is uninterested and has no desire to continue on in training."

A Community Mental Health Activity report notes the applicant was "an emergency referral from her unit." The evaluating mental health official noted that the applicant had a "chaotic home, work & educational background." She stated the applicant was currently experiencing a great deal of anxiety and recommended that she be administratively discharged as soon as possible.

On 18 June 1981 the applicant's unit commander initiated action to administratively separate the applicant from active duty under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-33 (Trainee Discharge Program). He cited the applicant's "lack of motivation, to complete BT [basic training]" and that in spite of being given "ample time to improve…failed to do so."

The applicant acknowledged receipt of the proposed separation and waived her entitlement to a separation physical examination. In her acknowledgement statement she indicated that she understood her entitlement to Department of Veterans Affairs benefits may be affected "due to noncompletion of requisite active duty time."

The commander's recommendation was approved and on 30 June 1981 the applicant was honorably discharged in pay grade E-1. She had 1 months and 15 days of active Federal service and 1 months and 17 days of inactive service. The narrative reason for her discharge was recorded as "Trainee Discharge Program (TDP) Marginal or Nonproductive." Her lost time was recorded as 810522-810529.

In 1983 the applicant made several requests for a copy of her separation document. In that correspondence she indicated that she had enlisted in March 1981 and been separated in June 1981. A notation in the remarks section of the applicant's separation document indicates that the document was "administratively issued" on 18 July 1986.

The two medical treatment documents, provided by the applicant in support of her request are annotated "for back" next to the applicant's signature on the documents. On document appears to be a prescription for "Naprosym" and the other document indicates the applicant should take medication "as directed." That document is dated in 1984.


TDP INFORMATION.

MED SEP INFO

PROM INFO

VA INFO

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 action was accomplished in compliance with the laws and regulations in effect at the time. Although it does appear that she may not have been issued a separation document at the time of her June 1981 separation, the fact that it was issued several years later does not negate the basis for her separation or serve as a reason to change the reason for her discharge.


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

__TSK __ __MHM__ __KYF __ DENY APPLICATION

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

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003083384
SUFFIX
RECON	YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED	20030701
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION	DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1.	108.00
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.