RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  5 June 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060017673 


	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.


Mr. Gerard W. Schwartz

Acting Director

Ms. Loretta D. Gulley

Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:


Ms. Linda D. Simmons

Chairperson

Mr. Joe R. Schroeder

Member

Mr. Chester A. Damian

Member

	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, in effect, that she be awarded a service ribbon (correctly known as the Army Service Ribbon (ASR)), that she be given a medical or hardship discharge, and that the separation authority be changed on her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that she is eligible for award of the ASR because she completed basic training.  The applicant also states, in effect, that she only wanted convalescent leave to return to California for a custody hearing that had been postponed once.  She did not want to be “kicked off” of active duty. The applicant finally states, in effect, that she was discharged from active duty while still in a cast and on crutches and therefore should be placed on the retired list or on the temporally retired list. 

3.  The applicant provided a copy her DD form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), DA Form 2173 (Statement of Medical Examination and Duty Status), a memorandum from 8th Transportation Bridge, a memorandum from the U.S. Army Reserve Personnel Command, a copy of Standard Form 600, and a copy a memorandum of medical treatment. 

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice which occurred on 2 May 2002, the date of her release from active duty.  The application submitted in this case is dated 21 December 2006.

2.  Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice.  This provision of law allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines that it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  In this case, the ABCMR will conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.

3.  The applicant's record shows that she enlisted into the United States Army Reserves (USAR) and was ordered to active duty for training in the Regular Army on 2 August 2001.  The applicant did complete basic combat training but did not complete advanced individual training, therefore she was not awarded a military occupational specialty (MOS).  The highest rank she attained while serving on active duty was Private First Class (E-3). 
4.  Item 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of the applicant's DD Form 214 shows that she received no awards while on active duty.

5.  Item 30 (Details of Accident - Remarks) of the applicant’s DA Form 2173 dated 26 April 2002, (Statement of Medical Examination and Duty Status) shows the applicant reported she was injured when she fell off a wall while at BCT, Fort Jackson, Carolina on 9 October 2001.

6.  The applicant’s Health Record (Standard Form 600) shows that she was treated for “recurring right ankle pain and giving way.”  The SF 600 also shows that the applicant requested convalescent leave.  

7.  Memorandum from the Department of Orthopedics, MacDonald Community Hospital, Fort Eustis, Virginia, dated 26 April 2007, subject:  the named applicant was evaluated by their department and found to require no further medical care.

8.  Memorandum from the 8th Transportation Brigade, Fort Eustis, Virginia, dated 
29 April 2002, subject:  Release From Active Duty, requested that the applicant be released from active duty prior to completion of active duty so she could recover from the injuries she received in January 2001.  

9.  Memorandum from the U.S. Army Reserve Personnel Command, St. Louis, Missouri, dated 30 April 2002, subject:  Early Release for IET (Initial Entry Training) authorized the release of the applicant from active duty due to a temporary personal hardship and a temporary medical disqualification.  The memorandum stated that the applicant was required to return to active duty prior to the suspense date of 1 October 2002 or be separated in accordance with AR 135-178, Chapter 5. 

10.  On 2 May 2002, the applicant was released from active duty and transferred back to the USAR after completing a total of 9 months and 1 day of required active military service.

11.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) shows that the Army Service Ribbon was established by the Secretary of the Army on 10 April 1981.  This regulation states, in pertinent part, that effective 1 August 1981, all members of the Active Army, Army National Guard, and Army Reserve in an active Reserve 



status are eligible for the award upon successful completion of initial entry training.  The award may be awarded retroactively to those personnel who completed the required training before 1 August 1981 provided they had an Active Army status on or after 1 August 1981.

12.  Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation) provides that the medical treatment facility commander with the primary care responsibility will evaluate those referred to him and will, if it appears as though the member is not medically qualified to perform duty or fails to meet retention criteria, refer the member to a medical evaluation board.  Those members who do not meet medical retention standards will be referred to a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) for a determination of whether they are able to perform the duties of their grade and military specialty with the medically disqualifying condition

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant requests award of the ASR, a medical or hardship discharge, and that the separation authority be changed on her DD Form 214.

2.  The Army Service Ribbon may be awarded to those personnel who successfully complete combat basic training and advanced individual training.  Evidence shows the applicant did not complete AIT.  Therefore, she is not entitled award of the Army Service Ribbon. 

3.  There is no evidence of record and the applicant has not submitted any evidence that shows she had a medical condition which would have warranted her being considered by a Medical Evaluation Board (MEBD) or PEB.  Therefore, the applicant could not have been issued a medical discharge or retired for physical unfitness.  There is also no basis for changing the separation authority on his DD Form 214.

4.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 2 May 2002; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on
1 May 2005.  The applicant did not file within the 3-year statute of limitations and has not provided a compelling explanation or evidence to show that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse failure to timely file in this case.




BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___LDS__  __JRS___  ___CAD   DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that 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 for correction of the records of the individual concerned.

2.  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 failure to timely file this application within the 3-year statute of limitations prescribed by law.  Therefore, there is insufficient basis to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing or for correction of the records of the individual concerned.



							
____Linda D. Simmons_____
          CHAIRPERSON










INDEX

CASE ID
AR
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
2007/06/05
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE
YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR . . . . .  
DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
Mr. Schwartz
ISSUES         1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.