Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080016362
Original file (20080016362.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

	IN THE CASE OF:	  

	BOARD DATE:	  11 December 2008

	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080016362 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests, in effect, that his reenlistment code 4 be changed so that he may enlist in the Army. 

2.  The applicant states that he has overcome his injuries.  He further states that he has obtained two degrees and would like to use his new profession to assist our nation and to complete his time in the United States Army and be able to retire.  He loves our nation and the United States Army.

3.  The applicant provides no supporting documentation.

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 30 March 1977, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army.  He completed his initial training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11C (Indirect Fire Infantryman).  He was subsequently assigned for duty as a personnel carrier driver at Fort Polk, Louisiana.  

3.  On 29 September 1979, the applicant was discharged for the purpose of immediate reenlistment in the Regular Army.  On 30 September 1979, he reenlisted.  He subsequently completed additional training and was awarded MOS 62J (General Construction Equipment Operator).  He was assigned for duty as a general construction machine operator at Schofield Barracks, Hawaii.   He returned to the Continental United States on or about 15 April 1983 for duty at Fort Drum, New York.    

4.  On 30 April 1985, the applicant was reassigned for duty at Fort Bragg, North Carolina.

5.  On 19 February 1986, the applicant was involved in a single vehicle motorcycle accident.  He sustained injuries to his right leg and left forearm.  His injuries were determined to be in the line of duty.

6.  On 24 May 1986, a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) convened to evaluate the applicant’s medical condition.  It found that he suffered from a fracture of the right medial femoral condyle [rounded protuberance at the end of the thigh bone] and from a fracture of the left forearm.  He was referred to a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB).  The applicant indicated that he did not desire to remain on active duty.  The findings and recommendation were approved by the proper authority and the applicant agreed with the MEB’s findings and recommendations.

7.  On 5 August 1986, a PEB convened to consider the applicant’s physical condition.  He was diagnosed as having a status post open reduction, internal femoral condyle fracture with residual chondral defect of the right femoral condyle requiring aids to ambulation rated as nonunion without loose motion.  Weight bearing was preserved with aids.  This condition was rated as 60 percent disabling.  He was also diagnosed as having a piedmont fracture of the left non-dominant forearm with adequate reduction in pins and plaster rated as radius, nonunion in lower half without loss of bone substance.  This condition was rated at 20 percent disabling.  He was found unfit for duty with a combined disability rating of 70 percent.  He was recommended for placement on the temporary disability retired list (TDRL) and to be medically reevaluated during August 1987.


8.  Accordingly, on 3 October 1986, the applicant was retired due to a temporary physical disability.  He had attained the rank of sergeant (SGT)/pay grade E-5, and had completed a total of 7 years, 6 months, and 5 days of creditable active duty service.  He was given a Separation Program Designator (SPD) Code of SFK and a reenlistment code of 4.  His character of service was honorable.  

9.  On 22 September 1987, the applicant underwent another PEB.  It found that the applicant’s fractures had healed but that his knee still rendered him unfit for duty.  His injury was rated at 20 percent disabling.   It further determined that it was unlikely that he would become fit for military duty in the foreseeable future and recommended that he be separated from the military service with severance pay, if otherwise qualified.  On 5 October 1987, the applicant concurred with the PEB's findings and recommendation and waived a formal hearing of his case.

10.  Army Regulation 601-210 prescribes eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing into the Regular Army (RA) and the Army Reserve.  Chapter 3 of that regulation prescribes basic eligibility for prior service applicants for enlistment and includes a list of armed forces RE Codes including RA RE codes.  RE 4 applies to persons separated from their last period of service with a non-waivable disqualification.  That regulation further provides that RE codes may only be changed if they are determined to be administratively incorrect.

11.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 (SPD Codes) provides the specific authorities and reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. The SPD code of SFK was the appropriate code for the applicant based upon the guidance provided in Army Regulation 635-5-1 for Soldiers separating under the provisions of AR 635-40, paragraph 4-24 due to temporary physical disability.  Additionally, Table 2-3 (SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table), Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) establishes RE Code 4 as the proper RE code to assign to Soldiers separated for this reason.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The reenlistment code 4, establishing his ineligibility for enlistment/
reenlistment, was correctly entered on his separation document in accordance with governing regulations.



2.  There is no apparent basis for removal or waiver of the applicant’s disqualification that established the basis for the reenlistment code 4.  While the applicant’s desire to continue in the service to his country is commendable, there is no provision for authorizing the change of a reenlistment code for this purpose.

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 the applicant's request.  

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

____X___  ____X___  ____X__  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 for correction of the records of the individual concerned.



	___________X____________
      CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20070016793



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080016362



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001061802C070421

    Original file (2001061802C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant states that after he was discharged from the Army, he had two operations to correct the nonunion of the femur fracture of his left leg. The applicant was discharged on 8 January 2001. c. discharging the applicant on 1 August 2001 because of physical disability with a 20 percent disability rating, and granting him additional severance pay based on this new discharge date.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012-00789

    Original file (PD2012-00789.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW BRANCH OF SERVICE: NAVY SEPARATION DATE: 20080128 NAME: CASE NUMBER: PD1200789 BOARD DATE: 20130103 SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty DC2/E-5 (Damage Control Man), medically separated for a left distal radius fracture. The conditions right distal radius fracture and left proximal fibular fracture as requested for consideration meet the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002081390C070215

    Original file (2002081390C070215.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. Pertinent Army regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned RE codes, based on their service records or the reason for discharge. The applicant was separated from active duty because of a disability and as such, was not eligible to reenlist, and received an SPD code of SFK and an RE code of 4.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002074842C070403

    Original file (2002074842C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, the applicant requests that his reentry (RE) code and his separation (SPD) code on his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be corrected so that he can reenlist in the Army. Pertinent Army regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned RE codes, based on their service records or the reason for discharge. Nevertheless, the applicant was separated from active duty in July 1992...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-01872

    Original file (PD-2014-01872.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Chronic Right Knee Pain Condition . After due deliberation in consideration of the preponderance of the evidence, the Board concluded that there was insufficient cause to recommend a change in the PEB fitness determination for the left knee stress fracture condition and so no additional disability rating is recommended. Physical Disability Board of Review

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01179

    Original file (PD2012 01179.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    RATING COMPARISON : ServiceIPEB – Dated 20030221VA -( 2 weeks Pre-Separation)ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Bilateral Medial Tibial Plateau Stress FractureR-5003-5262 L-5003-526210% 0%Stress Fracture, Lt. Medial Tibial Plateau and FemoralCondyle526220%*20030303Bilateral Medial Femoral Condyles Stress FractureCAT IIIStress Fracture, Right. It is noted for the record that the Board is subject to the same laws for disability entitlements as those under which the Disability...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD-2012-00728

    Original file (PD-2012-00728.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Any conditions or contention not requested in this application, or otherwise outside the Board’s defined scope of review, remain eligible for future consideration by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records. Left tibial stress fracture with bilateral femoral stress reactions.” The L3 profile listed “bilateral lower leg stress fractures.” The commander’s statement indicated complaints of leg pains, noted “stress fractures in both lower legs” without improvement following being “sent...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080006853

    Original file (20080006853.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Because she was rated less than 30 percent disabled and had less than 20 years of active service, her condition required separation with severance pay in lieu of retirement. Since the VASRD has no rating schedule for these conditions, rating by analogy will be done as follows: (1) If there is X-ray evidence of fracture of the femur or tibia, it should be rated as any other fracture. Operating under different law and its own policies and regulations, the DVA, which has neither the authority...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080018014

    Original file (20080018014.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    U.S. Army Physical Evaluation Board, Walter Reed Army Medical Center, letter, dated 27 December 1985, shows the Alternate Board Recorder advised the applicant that the U.S. Army PEB had reevaluated her physical condition and recommended that she be retained on the TDRL with reexamination during the month of January 1987. U.S. Army Physical Evaluation Board, Walter Reed Army Medical Center, letter, dated 9 June 1988, shows the Board Recorder informed the applicant that a formal PEB hearing...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002080085C070215

    Original file (2002080085C070215.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 18 July 1978, the applicant was separated from the service in an entry-level status under the provisions of paragraph 4-24b(3), Army Regulation (AR) 635-40 by reason of physical disability with severance pay. Orders Number 30-1, dated 25 February 1986, Department of the Army, Headquarters, United States Army Medical Department Activity, Fort Jackson, South Carolina,...