RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  20 March 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060010354 


	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.


	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests reconsideration to have her 18 April 2005 discharge, under Army Regulation (AR) 635-200, Paragraph 5-17, by reason of physical condition, not a disability voided and restore her to active duty, or in the alternative, change her reentry (RE) code to permit her to reenter the military.

2.  The applicant essentially disagrees with the original record of proceedings, and submits new evidence and arguments that were not previously considered.

3.  The applicant provides the following in support of this application:

	a.  a letter, dated 25 April 2006, from a Soldier claiming to have served with the applicant in the 34th Military Police Detachment;

	b.  an undated letter from a Soldier claiming to be from the 34th Military Police Detachment;

	c.  a letter of appreciation, dated 27 July 2001;

	d.  a letter, dated 3 April 2003, from a colonel recommending favorable consideration for the readmission of the applicant into the United States Army;

	e.  a letter, dated 10 November 2003, from a doctor who removed a tattoo from the left side of the applicant’s neck;

	f.  a memorandum for record, dated 7 March 2005, which essentially stated that the applicant was not authorized to draw any weapon from the arms room until further notice;

	g.  a DA Form 4856 (Developmental Counseling Form) from a counseling that took place on 6 April 2005; 

	h.  a memorandum, dated 28 March 2003, subject:  Rehabilitative Transfer of [the applicant];

	i.  a DA Form 4856 from a counseling that took place on 28 March 2005;

	j.  a list showing that she had a medical appointment on 31 March 2005; and

	k.  a newspaper article, dated 23 June 2006, from The Boston Globe.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20060004004, on 30 March 2006.

2.  The applicant provided a letter, dated 25 April 2006, from a Soldier claiming to have served with the applicant in the 34th Military Police Detachment.  This letter essentially stated that from what she remembered of the applicant, she was a good Soldier.  She also stated, in pertinent part, that she did not ever get to talk to the applicant much.  

3.  In an undated letter, a Soldier claiming to be from the 34th Military Police Detachment essentially stated that she was not in any way immediately involved in the issues that the applicant was having in her platoon.  This letter also stated, in pertinent part, that from the short time she had known the applicant, she proved to be a hard worker and very respectful of her leaders.

4.  The applicant provided a letter of appreciation, dated 27 July 2001, which was given to her during her first enlistment.

5.  The applicant provided a letter, dated 3 April 2003, from a colonel recommending favorable consideration for the readmission of the applicant into the United States Army.  This letter apparently was part of the basis for her waiver to reenter the Army.  It stated, in pertinent part, that the applicant was discharged involving an incident that had to do with getting a tattoo on her neck, which by Army regulations is not permitted.  The colonel further states that the applicant had subsequently removed the tattoo and was ready to continue her service to the Army and Nation.

6.  The applicant also provided a letter, dated 10 November 2003, from a doctor who removed a tattoo from the left side of the applicant’s neck.

7.  The applicant further provided a memorandum for record, dated 7 March 2005, which essentially stated that the applicant was not authorized to draw any weapon from the arms room until further notice.

8.  The applicant provided a DA Form 4856 from a counseling that took place on 6 April 2005.  This document shows that her platoon sergeant told her when she first came to the platoon that his noncommissioned officers were not going to shuttle the applicant around to and from work, and that it was her responsibility to find a way to work.

9.  The applicant provided a memorandum, dated 28 March 2003, subject:  Rehabilitative Transfer of [the applicant].  This document shows, in pertinent part, that the applicant essentially stated that she “cannot take it anymore, I am stressed out.”  She also essentially stated that she did not want to stay in the Army.

10.  The applicant also provided a DA Form 4856 from a counseling she received on 28 March 2005.  This document essentially informed the applicant that she was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder, and possibly a personality disorder.  This document also stated, in pertinent part, that medical personnel recommended that she be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5-13.

11.  In her request for reconsideration, the applicant essentially disagrees with the majority of the original record of proceedings.  She did not however, provide evidence which shows that her positions and contentions are correct by a preponderance of the evidence.

12.  Army Regulation 15-185 (Army Board for Correction of Military Records) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the ABCMR.  This regulation provides that the ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity.  The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that the denial of her request to have her discharge on 18 April 2005 voided and that she be restored to active duty, or in the alternative, that her RE code be changed to permit her to reenter the military should be reconsidered.

2.  It is clear that the applicant vehemently disagrees with her involuntary discharge under AR 635-200, paragraph 5-17, by reason of “physical condition, not a disability”, and the majority of the original ABCMR record of proceedings.  However, evidence of record confirms that the applicant’s discharge processing was accomplished in accordance with applicable regulations and that her discharge accurately reflects her overall record of service.  The type of discharge 

directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.  Evidence of record also confirms that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.

3.  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.  

4.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting relief to the applicant in this case.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__KN ___  ___DH __  ___LD  __  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20060004004, dated 30 March 2006.




____Kathleen Newman______
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20060010354
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
20070320
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
HD
DATE OF DISCHARGE
20050418
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR 635-200, PARAGRAPH 5-17
DISCHARGE REASON
PHYSICAL CONDITION – NOT A DISABILITY
BOARD DECISION
DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
AR 15-185
ISSUES         1.
100.0300.0000
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.