RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  24 April 2008
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080002731 


	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.


 

Director

 

Analyst
      The following members, a quorum, were present:




Chairperson



Member



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 that the reason for her discharge be changed to medical.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that she was discharged due to asthma. 

3.  The applicant provides copies of her Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214) and her service medical records.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  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 also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant’s failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  On 28 October 1987, the applicant underwent a medical examination for the purpose of enlistment in the Regular Army.  Item 74 (Summary of Defects and Diagnosis) of the applicant’s Report of Medical Examination states that she was diagnosed with asthma in childhood but had no recurrence since 10 years of age. She was found qualified for enlistment.

3.  On 21 June 1988, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years.  She commenced her initial training at Fort McClellan, Alabama. 

4.  The applicant’s service medical records show that:

      a.  on 29 June 1988, the applicant requested medical evaluation for her reported asthma.  She complained of nasal congestion and post-nasal drainage and stated that the weather aggravated her asthmatic condition.  She was diagnosed with strep throat and prescribed antibiotics; 




      b.  on 30 June 1988, the applicant was taken to the medical emergency room.  Her drill instructor stated that she was hyperventilating and had passed out.  She also complained of irregular menses and excessive bleeding during the previous 2 days.  A medical examination found that her hyperventilation had resolved itself and that she was otherwise medically normal.  The medical officer directed that she drink plenty of fluids;

      c.  on 5 July 1988, the applicant complained of a sore throat.  She was diagnosed with swollen tonsils, cough, nasal discharge, headaches, and vertigo. She was prescribed medicine for asthma;

      d.  on 29 July 1988, the applicant complained of a sore throat.  She was diagnosed with a sinus infection and prescribed antibiotics;

      e.  on 6 August 1988, the applicant complained of rash and bleeding to her right leg around the ankle causing itching and pain.  She was diagnosed with a leg rash that may have been caused by irritation from her wool socks.  She was prescribed an antibiotic;

      f.  on 20 August 1988, the applicant complained of vomiting.  She was diagnosed with a viral gastroenteritis and admitted to the hospital; 

      g.  on 2 September 1988, the applicant complained of nausea and vomiting.  She was diagnosed with gastroenteritis and dehydration; and

      h.  on 7 September 1988, the applicant was still experiencing nausea and vomiting.  
   
5.  The applicant's military records show that she received performance counseling as follows:

	a.  on  23 July 1988, for failing the diagnostic Army physical fitness test (APFT);

	b.  on 31 July 1988, for lack of motivation;

	c.  on 1 August 1988, for lack of military customs and courtesy;

	d.  on 7 August 1988, for lack of motivation;

	e.  on 8 August 1988, for Phase I counseling [no specifics provided];
      f.  on 9 August 1988, for lack of motivation, failure to adapt, and disobeying a lawful order;
      
      g.  on 14 August 1988, for lack of responsibility;
      
      h.  on 19 August 1988, for failure to qualify [APFT] first and second attempt; and
      
      i.  on 23 August 1988, for poor performance.

6.  On 23 August 1988, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation.  The applicant's behavior was passive.  She was fully alert and oriented but displayed an anxious mood.  Her thinking was clear, her thought content normal and her memory good.  There was no significant mental illness.  The applicant was mentally responsible.  She had the mental capability to participate in her separation processing.

7.  On 25 August 1988, the applicant’s commander recommended separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 11-3 (Entry Level Status), for inability to adjust to military life as evidenced by her apathetic attitude toward training and adjustment disorder with depressed mood.  

8.  On 25 August 1988, the applicant waived her right to consult with counsel and elected not to make a statement in her own behalf.

9.  On 20 September 1988, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation and directed that she be discharged with service uncharacterized under the provisions of AR 635-200, paragraph 11-3a, by reason of entry level status.

10.  Accordingly, on 23 September 1988, the applicant was discharged in an Entry Level Status with service uncharacterized.   She had completed 3 months and 3 days of creditable active service.

11.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 11, of this regulation, in effect at the time, provided, for the separation of personnel due to unsatisfactory performance, conduct, or both, while in an entry level status.  This provision of regulation applied to individuals who had demonstrated that they were not qualified for retention because they could not adapt socially or emotionally to military life, or because they lacked the aptitude, ability, motivation or self discipline for military 
service, or that they had demonstrated characteristics not compatible with satisfactory continued service.  The separation policy applies to Soldiers who cannot meet the minimum standards prescribed for successful completion of training because of lack of aptitude, ability, motivation or self-discipline.  The regulation requires uncharacterized service for separation under this chapter.

12.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 5-11 specifically provides that Soldiers who were not medically qualified under procurement medical fitness standards, when accepted for enlistment, or who became medically disqualified under these standards prior to entrance on active duty or active duty training or initial entry training will be separated.  A medical proceeding, regardless of the date completed, must establish that a medical condition was identified by appropriate medical authority within six months of the Soldier’s initial entrance on active duty, that the condition would have permanently or temporarily disqualified the Soldier for entry into the military service had it been detected at that time, and the medical condition does not disqualify the Soldier from retention in the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 40-501, chapter 3.  The characterization of service for Soldiers separated under this provision of regulation will normally be honorable, but will be uncharacterized if the Soldier is in an entry level status.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record clearly shows that the applicant had an asthmatic condition as well as other medical ailments.  However, there is insufficient evidence to substantiate that any of her medical conditions were either aggravated by this period of service or unfitting.  

2.  The applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize her rights.

3.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all of the facts of the case 

4.  The narrative reason for the applicant’s discharge was correctly entered on her separation document in accordance with governing regulations.  There is no evidence of error or injustice.

5.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___X_____  ___X_____  ____X____  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

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.




						__________X____________      									CHAIRPERSON

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080002731



6


DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
1901 SOUTH BELL STREET 2ND FLOOR
ARLINGTON, VA  22202-4508