IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 23 December 2010
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100016870
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, removal of the code contained in her record that is hindering her from enlisting in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR).
2. The applicant states:
* she has a code in her military record that has her flagged as depressed and it is hindering her from enlisting
* she attempted to enlist in the USAR and after finishing the medical process at the Military Entrance Processing Station at Fort Jackson, SC, she was told her records were flagged
3. The applicant provides a copy of her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. On 2 April 1998, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for 4 years. She completed training as a logistics automation specialist. She extended her enlistment for 6 months on 27 March 2001, adjusting her expiration of term of service date to 1 October 2002.
2. The facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant's release from active duty (REFRAD) are not on file. Her DD Form 214 shows she was honorably REFRAD on 24 June 2002 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Enlisted Personnel Separations), paragraph 5-8, due to parenthood and she was transferred to the USAR to complete her Reserve obligation. She completed 4 years, 2 months, and 23 days of net active duty service this period. She received a reentry eligibility (RE) code 3 and a separation program designator (SPD) code LDG (which means separation for parenthood).
3. On 15 February 2006, the applicant was placed on a permanent physical profile for chronic bilateral shin splints. Code C is shown in item 2 (Codes Table 7-2 Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness)) of her DA Form 3349 (Physical Profile).
4. The applicant was honorably discharged from the USAR on 21 February 2006.
5. Army Regulation 601-210 (Active and Reserve Components Enlistment Program) covers eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing into the Regular Army, U.S. Army Reserve, and Army National Guard. The regulation states that prior to discharge or REFRAD, individuals will be assigned RE codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge. Chapter 3 prescribes basic eligibility for prior-service applicants for enlistment and includes a list of Armed Forces RE codes. An RE code 3 applies to persons who have a waivable disqualification.
6. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator Codes) prescribes the specific authorities (regulatory, statutory, or other directives) and reasons for the separation of members from active military service and the SPD code to be used for these stated reasons.
7. The SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table provides instructions for determining the RE code for Regular Army Soldiers and Reserve Component Soldiers separated for cause. The SPD code LDG has a corresponding RE code 3.
8. Army Regulation 40-501 provides information on medical fitness standards for induction, enlistment, appointment, retention, and related policies and procedures. It states that profile code C applies to assignment limitations in running, marching, and standing for long periods.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant contends the code in her record, showing she was flagged as depressed and hindering her from enlistment, should be removed.
2. Her contentions have been noted. However, her records show she was REFRAD due to parenthood. She was assigned an RE code 3 and an SPD code LDG (which means separation for parenthood) based on her reason for separation.
3. She was subsequently placed on a physical profile for chronic bilateral shin splints and she was issued a profile code C, which implies that at the time of her discharge from the USAR she had assignment limitations in running, marching, and standing for long periods.
4. However, the available record does not show her records were flagged as a result of a code showing she suffers from depression, and she does not identify where in her records this code is supposedly located. If she could identify the record where this code is, she may apply for reconsideration.
5. In view of the foregoing, the applicant's request should be denied.
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 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) AR20100016870
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100016870
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130004518
The applicant requests correction of her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show in: * item 26 (Separation Code) something other than LDG * item 27 (Reentry (RE) Code) something other than 3 2. She waived additional time to complete her family care plan and acknowledged she understood that her separation under Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-8 (Involuntary separation for parenthood) would be initiated. ...
ARMY | DRB | CY2015 | AR20150002814
The evidence of record shows on 17 January 2007, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 5, paragraph 5-8, AR 635-200, by reason of parenthood, for failing to implement and maintain an adequate family care plan, with an honorable discharge. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110009614
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 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. Accordingly, her DD Form 214 should be corrected to show that the correct separation authority is Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 6-3(b) and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080017539
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. These codes are contained on military discharge documents and determine whether or not one may reenlist or enlist in a military service at a later time. Since the reason for a Soldier's separation drives the SPD issued, which in turn determines what RE code is authorized, and the applicant has provided no...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080011203
The applicant was identified as being non-deployable, non-retainable in accordance with Army Regulation 40-501 (Standard of Medical Fitness), and was recommended for discharge from the service. Based on a review of objective medical evidence of record, the PEB found that the applicants medical and physical impairments prevented reasonable performance of duties required by her grade and military specialty and recommended a disability percentage of 20 percent for chronic left knee pain and 0...
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012-00119
I have been (ever since my Army separation undergoing treatment with VA for my disabilities. Bilateral Shin Splints Condition . Therefore, the Board deliberated three rating recommendations, which are all compliant with VASRD §4.71a: 1) A bilateral rating of 10%, coded 5022 (periostitis); 2) Separate 10% ratings, coded with preferred analogous VASRD code 5262-5022 (tibia and fibula, impairment of) for the rating of shin splints conceding §4.40 (“a part which becomes painful on use must be...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 03099127C070212
Her report of medical examination completed prior to her enlistment shows that she was medically fit with a physical profile serial of 1 1 1 1 1 1. A medical report indicates that the applicant was seen on 20 December 2000 because of headache and lower back pain. It provides for medical evaluation boards, which are convened to document a Soldier’s medical status and duty limitations insofar as duty is affected by the Soldier’s status.
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01728
The Board’s authority as defined in DoDI 6044.40, however, resides in evaluating the fairness of DES fitness determinations and rating decisions for disability at the time of separation. The Board then considered its rating recommendation for the unfitting right and left shin splint conditions at the time of separation. The MEB forwarded the right foot pain condition as medically acceptable.The right foot condition was reviewed and considered by the Board.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110009736
b. her initial "Report of Medical Examination" completed on 23 April 1997 shows she did not have any problems with her lower extremities and her feet were determined to have a normal arch. She was sent to the Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) for shin splints and flat feet. There is insufficient evidence to show the applicant's PEB findings were incorrect, that the applicant's shin splints did not exist prior to her service in the Army, that her leg condition was permanently aggravated by her...
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02790
The Informal PEB (IPEB) adjudicated patellofemoral pain, bilateral knee, rated 0% with likely application of the US Army Physical Disability Agency (USAPDA) pain policy; and the left tibial stress fracture as unfitting, rated 0% with likely application of the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).The remaining conditions (back, left hip and asthma) were determined to be not unfitting. The examiner noted tenderness over the left shin.At the VA C&P exam performed 2 months prior to...