IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 16 November 2010
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100012388
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 correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release for Discharge from Active Duty) to show his correct date of discharge.
2. The applicant states, in effect, that he was discharged early due to the pending shutdown of the installation during the holidays and that his date of discharge should be the last day of holiday vacation. The correction would give him 90 days of service.
3. The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214.
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 applicants 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 applicants failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.
2. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 23 September 1981.
3. On 10 December 1981, he was diagnosed with severe chronic blepharitis. The examining physician recommended that he meet a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) for consideration of separation on the basis that he did not meet medical fitness standards or standards for retention. The examining physician also found that the condition existed prior to service (EPTS).
4. The applicant acknowledged the diagnosis and he indicated he understood it was an EPTS condition.
5. On 10 December 1981, he applied for an expeditious discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-40 (Personnel Separations - Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation), chapter 5 (Expeditious Discharge).
6. A DA Form 3947 (Medical Board Proceedings) shows an MEB found the applicant medically unfit for further military service based on the diagnosis of blepharitis, chronic, severe (chronic, severe inflammation of the eyelids) and recommended his separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-40, chapter 5.
7. On 14 December 1981, the findings and recommendations of the MEB were approved. The applicant acknowledged he had been informed of the findings and recommendations and he indicated he did not wish to appeal.
8. On 15 December 1981, the applicant's commander was informed of the approved separation and that separation would be accomplished within 72 hours in accordance with Army Regulation 635-40, chapter 5. On 18 December 1981, the applicant was honorably discharged. He completed 2 months and 26 days of total active service.
9. Army Regulation 635-40, chapter 5, in effect at the time, provided for the expeditious discharge of an enlisted member who did not meet retention medical fitness standards and was unable to perform the duties of his office, grade, rank, or rating because of physical disability neither incurred nor aggravated during a period in which he was entitled to basic pay. A Soldier would be offered a chance for expeditious discharge provided that he agreed with the findings of the MEB and was otherwise eligible for discharge. The regulation further provided that commanders authorized to affect the discharge of members under the provisions of this chapter would effect such discharge within 72 hours of the order authorizing discharge.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The evidence of record does not support the applicant's request for correction of his date of discharge.
2. The applicant acknowledged the findings and recommendations of an MEB and elected not to appeal. Upon approval of his separation, he was discharged within 72 hours as required by the governing regulation. There is no evidence showing the applicant was discharged early due to upcoming holidays.
3. In view of the above, there is no basis for granting the requested relief.
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) AR20100012388
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100012388
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110025032
The applicant requests correction of the narrative reason for his discharge from Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separation), paragraph 5-9, to medical discharge. Chapter 5 provides that Soldiers who are not medically qualified under procurement medical fitness standards when accepted for enlistment, or who became medically disqualified under these standards prior to entry on active duty, active duty for training, or initial entry training will be separated. A medical proceeding...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090000440
The applicant provides the following documents in support of this application which were previously seen by the board: a. a copy of his Report of Medical History dated 10 August 1981, b. multiple pages of Standard Forms (SF) 600 (Chronological Record of Medical Care) from February through April 1982, c. a copy of his medical evaluation board (MEB), dated 30 April 1982, CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The evidence of record shows that the applicant started seeking treatment for his feet within...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130011502
He was told at the time that he had rheumatic fever and he was hospitalized for 2 weeks. On 22 August 1967, a medical evaluation board (MEB) convened at Fort Bragg, NC, and after consideration of clinical records, laboratory findings, and physical examinations, the MEB determined the applicant had the medical conditions of Valvulitis, rheumatic, inactive with deformity of the aortic valve; and Valvulitis, rheumatic, inactive with deformity of the mitral valve, both existed prior to service...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140013687
The applicant states, in effect: * he was discharged because of a diagnosis of Friedreich's ataxia (a rare inherited disease that causes nervous system damage) * at the time of his discharge, the Army did not consider this disease as military-related * the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) approved service-connection for this disease * based upon the evidence of record, he feels he should have been medically discharged as a result of a service-connected disability * he requests his records...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090005405
The applicant requests correction of his records to show he was medically discharged. Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation) governs the separation of Soldiers who are physically unfit because of physical disability. Chapter 9 of Army Regulation 635-40, in effect at the time of the applicants discharge, provided the procedures for the expeditious discharge for disabilities existing prior to service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110009981
His records show he did not complete his training; however, his DD Form 214 shows he held military occupational specialty 57A (Duty Soldier). He also acknowledged that his entitlement to VA benefits would be determined by the VA, and that he would be separated by reason of physical disability (EPTS) and would receive a discharge commensurate with the character of his service. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Personnel Separations Separation Program Designators), Appendix (Separation Program...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140016808
The applicant requests, in effect, that his discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Enlisted Personnel), chapter 5 be changed to a medical discharge. Chapter 5 provides that Soldiers who are not medically qualified under procurement medical fitness standards when accepted for enlistment, or who became medically disqualified under these standards prior to entry on active duty, active duty for training, or initial entry training will be separated. A medical proceeding...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140012677
He left the Army in January 1982. g. The MEB based their findings on his first hearing test that he failed. He was found unfit for further military service and the board recommended his separation from active duty in accordance with Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation), chapter 5. The MEB recommended his separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-40, chapter 5, for Physical Disability - EPTS Medical Board.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110010226
The applicant requests, in effect, removal of the separation program designator (SPD) code "KFN" from item 9c (Authority and Reason) and the statement "physical disability, existed prior to service (EPTS), medical board" from item 27 (Remarks) of his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty). However, his record contains the applicant's command endorsements approving his medical evaluation board (MEB) proceedings wherein he was found to have a condition which existed prior to his...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090016572
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 13 April 2010 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20090016572 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. Army Regulation 635-40, chapter 5, in effect at the time, provided for the separation of enlisted personnel who were not qualified for retention on active duty by reason of physical disability which was neither incurred nor aggravated during any period in which the member was entitled to basic pay.