PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:            17 August 2000 
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000035263

	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. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Ms. Deborah L. Brantley		Senior Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Sherri V. Ward		Chairperson	
	Mr. Melvin H. Meyer		Member	
	Ms. Linda D. Simmons		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests, in effect, that he be promoted to the grade of captain, that he be separated or retired by reason of physical disability, and that he be awarded an Army Commendation Medal, Expert Qualification Badge with “pistol” bar, Army Good Conduct Medal and the Armed Forces Reserve Medal.  He also asks that his period of service on his 1986 DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be corrected to accurately reflect his active and reserve service.

3.  The applicant states that he was passed over for promotion to the grade of captain in March 1986 “based on a flag on [his] file for being overweight” when in fact he was “within established weight limits.”  He states that he sustained an injury to his knee in 1983 while running and reinjured the knee in 1985 and again in 1986 when he “became non-deployable.”  He notes that he requested a medical evaluation board to determine “if [his] injuries would result in [his] medical discharge or retirement” but his request was denied.  He indicates he is now receiving a 50 percent disability rating from the VA for his knee condition.  The applicant states that he was told he was being recommended for the Army Commendation Medal as a result of his actions during a bomb attack at Fort Meade, Maryland and even saw the narrative write-up about his actions.  However, he states that a member of his chain of command “tore it up in front of [him] and [he was told] to forget about it.” He states that had he not resigned as a result of actions by members of his chain of command he would have completed his three year tour of duty and been awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal.  He also notes that based on his active and reserve service he is entitled to the Armed Forces Reserve Medal.  He states that his service information is incorrect on his 1986 DD Form 214.  The applicant submits no evidence in support of his request except for his self-authored statement.

4.  Records available to the Board indicate the applicant served as a member of the U.S. Coast Guard Reserve, U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) and Army National Guard between 21 May 1977 and 5 September 1983.  During that period he served a total of 5 months and 20 days of active service with the remaining 
5 years, 9 months and 25 days as inactive service.

5.  On 6 September 1983 the applicant entered active duty as an USAR second lieutenant.  He was promoted to first lieutenant in May 1984.  

6.  In September 1984 the applicant received a letter of reprimand for his “conduct on 13 September1984 when [the applicant] physically struck another officer repeatedly in anger [and] in the presence of numerous soldiers.”  In June 1985 he received a letter of reprimand for his “reprehensible behavior in obtaining private information concerning the senior rater comments of several officers in this battalion and then relating their senior rater block checks prior to them being counseled by their rater.”

7.  The applicant was placed in a weight control program in September 1985 and removed in December 1985 when he met the Army’s weight control standards.  His February 1986 performance evaluation report noted that he was “within the body fat standard.”

8.  The applicant received four performance evaluation reports between February 1982 and February 1986.  Eight different officers were involved in his ratings during that period and in each case his raters indicated he should be “promoted with contemporaries” and that in all but one case he “usually exceeded requirements.”  On one report his rater indicated he “met requirements.”  The reports noted that he passed his annual physical fitness test in May 1984, March 1985 and July 1985.  On only one of the four reports did his senior rater rate him as center of mass.  On the three remaining reports he was rated below center of mass.

9.  On 25 March 1986 the applicant’s request for relief from active duty was approved and on 11 April 1986 he was honorably discharged.  Block 12 (record of service) on his DD Form 214 indicates he had 2 years, 7 months and 6 days of active service between 6 September 1983 and 11 April 1986, 5 months and 20 days of prior active service and 4 years, 1 months and 14 days of prior inactive service.  

10.  In November 1995 the applicant was honorably discharged from the USAR.  

11.  Army Regulation 635-40 states that disability compensation is not an entitlement acquired by reason of service-incurred illness or injury; rather, it is provided to soldiers whose service is interrupted and they can no longer continue to reasonably perform because of a physical disability incurred or aggravated in service.  When a solider is being processed for separation or retirement for reasons other than physical disability, continued performance of assigned duty commensurate with his or her rank or grade until the soldier is scheduled for separation or retirement, creates a presumption that the soldier is fit.  The presumption of fitness may be overcome if the evidence establishes that the soldier was, in fact, physically unable to perform adequately the duties of his or her office, grade, rank or rating for a period of time because of disability.  There must be a causative relationship between the less than adequate duty performance and the unfitting medical condition or conditions.  The presumption of fitness may also be overcome by an acute, grave illness or injury or other significant deterioration of the soldier’s physical condition occurred immediately prior to, or coincident with processing for separation or retirement for reasons other than physical disability and which rendered the soldier unfit for further duty. 

12.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 states that the Army Commendation Medal is a personal decoration which requires a recommendation, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders.
13.  A marksmanship qualification badge is awarded to indicate the degree in which an individual has qualified in a prescribed record course and an appropriate bar is furnished to denote each weapon with which he or she qualified.

14.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 also states that the Army Good Conduct Medal is only awarded to enlisted soldiers.

15.  The Armed Forces Reserve Medal was established in 1950 and awarded for honorable and satisfactory service as a member or former member of one or more of the Reserve Components of the United States, including the Coast Guard Reserve and the Marine Corps Reserve, for a period of 10 years within a period of 12 consecutive years.  For service performed on or after 1 July 1949, a member must accumulate, during each anniversary year, a minimum of 50 retirement points.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  While the applicant maintains that he was not selected for promotion to captain based on erroneous information concerning his weight status, there is no evidence which supports that contention.  Rather the Board notes that the applicant’s performance was rated acceptable at best and he received two letters of reprimand which certainly would have impacted on his non-selection for promotion to captain.

2.  There is no evidence, and the applicant has not provided any, that he had any unfitting medical condition which warranted disability processing.  His performance evaluation reports indicate that he consistently passed the Army’s physical fitness test.

3.  There is no evidence, and the applicant has not provided any, that he was ever recommended for or awarded the Army Commendation Medal or that he qualified as an expert with a pistol.  As such there is no basis to award the applicant those decorations.

4.  The applicant was an officer and as such even if he would have served three years of active military service he would not have been eligible for the Army Good Conduct Medal as that decoration is awarded only to enlisted soldiers.

5.  While the applicant may have accumulated more than 10 years of Reserve service by the time he was honorably discharged in 1995 there is no evidence indicating that he accumulated the required 50 retirement points each year in order to qualify for the award.  As such there is no basis to award him the Armed Forces Reserve Medal.

6.  Block 12e (total prior inactive service) on the applicant’s 1986 DD Form 214 incorrectly reflects that the applicant had only 4 years, 1 months and 14 days of prior inactive status when in fact his records indicate that the had 5 years, 
9 months and 25 days as inactive service.  It would be appropriate to correct his records accordingly.

7.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing in block 12e (total prior inactive service) of the applicant’s 1986 DD Form 214 that he had 5 years, 9 months, and 25 days of inactive service.

2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied 

BOARD VOTE:  

__svw___  ___mhm__  ___lds__  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000035263	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20000817	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	Grant	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	107.00	
2.	108.00	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.