MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            8 August 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000038549

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. Joseph A. Adriance		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Stanley Kelley		Chairperson	
	Mr. James E. Anderholm		Member	
	Mr. Ronald E. Blakely		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

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

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  In effect, that a Department of the Army (DA) Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report-AER) be removed from his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) and that he be reinstated into the United States Army Sergeants Major Course (USASMC) in order to complete the course.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was disenrolled from Class Number (#) 
23 of the USASMC (Nonresident) based on not meeting Army body fat standards.  He claims that his exceeding body fat standards was the result of his inability to exercise as a result of a knee injury he suffered on 5 May 1998.  He states that he was disenrolled when he reported for the resident phase of the course on 4 June 1998 after it was discovered that he exceeded body fat standards.  He indicates that the injury he received resulted in an inordinate weight gain because it prevented him from participating in daily workout exercises.  He also comments that the date of his injury was after the 2 May 1998 date allowed by the June 1998 Class Resident Phase Pamphlet, for submitting class deferments.  In addition, he indicates that he has since recovered from his injury and is now able to participate in unrestricted physical activity.  Therefore, he would like to attend the resident phase of the course to complete his USASMC requirements so that he may graduate from the course.  He submits a doctor’s letter in support of his application.  

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

The applicant is currently serving in an Individual Mobilization Augmentation (IMA) status in the United Sates Army Reserve (USAR) and holds the rank of Sergeant Major/E-9 (SGM/E-9).  

On 4 June 1998, a DA Form 5500-R (Body Fat Worksheet) was prepared on the applicant upon his arrival at the United States Army Sergeants Major Academy (USASMA), Fort Bliss, Texas, where he was to attend the resident phase of USASMC (Nonresident) Class #23.  This worksheet showed that the applicant was 69.75 inches tall and that he weighed 222 pounds which exceeded his maximum allowable screening weight of 189 by 33 pounds and that his percentage of body fat was 26.50, which exceeded the percent of body fat standard of 26.00 percent by .50 percent.  

On 4 June 1998, he was issued an AER that indicated, in block 13 
(Performance Summary), that the applicant had “failed to meet course standards.”  Block 16 (Comments) of the AER contained remarks that indicated that he was disenrolled from the Nonresident Course based on his failure to maintain satisfactory academic standards by not being within the body fat standards of Army Regulation 600-9.  Further, it stated that no determination had been made regarding how the course failure reflected on the applicant’s character, behavior, or lack of aptitude in certain areas.  
On 25 March 1999, the applicant submitted an appeal requesting he be allowed to reenroll in the resident phase of the USASMC.  He indicated that he had completed all the other requirements of the course up to that point and desired the opportunity to graduate from the course.  He also stated that he had suffered a knee injury on 5 May 1998, which prevented him from performing daily workout exercises and these restrictions caused by his condition prevented him from maintaining a proper level of physical fitness. 

In support of his case the applicant provides a letter from a medical doctor, dated 2 April 1999.  In this letter, the doctor indicates that the applicant was seen and evaluated on 30 March 1999 as a result of a knee injury he received on 5 May 1998.  The doctor also states that the examination revealed that there was degenerative spurring, including the posterior putella and the tribial spine region, in the applicant’s left knee.  The doctor made no specific independent judgement as to whether this condition impacted the applicant’s ability to maintain body fat standards, except to comment that the applicant stated that his condition resulted in decreased exercise, which resulted in an inordinate weight gain.  

On 1 June 1999, the Acting Commandant of the USASMA returned the applicant’s appeal without action.  He indicated that, in accordance with Army Regulation 351-1, soldiers eliminated from the USASMC would not be eligible for re-entry into the course for other than cogent reasons.  This reply also advised the applicant that by regulation he had the right to apply to this Board for reinstatement into the course.  

Paragraph 5-30c (4) b of Army Regulation 351-1 states, in pertinent part, that soldiers eliminated from the USASMC will not be eligible for re-entry into the course for other than cogent reasons.  Army Regulation 600-9 (The Army Weight Control Program) establishes policies and procedures for the implementation of the Army Weight Control Program.  Table 2 (Maximum Allowable Percent Body Fat Standards) indicates that the maximum allowable body fat percentage for male members in age group 40 and older is 26.  

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  The Board noted the applicant’s contention that a knee injury he suffered on 
5 May 1998 led to his being disenrolled from the USASMC because it prevented him from participating in daily workout exercises and resulted in an inordinate weight gain that resulted in his exceeding Army body fat standards.  However, the Board finds this argument lacks sufficient mitigation to warrant relief.

2.  Notwithstanding the cutoff date for submission of deferment requests referred to by the applicant, the Board finds it difficult to understand why the applicant did not at least contact his course faculty advisor to at least address his injury and weight gain prior to attending the resident phase of the course.  Further, the Board concludes that his claim that an injury he suffered less than 30 days prior to his weight evaluation was solely responsible for the weight gain that led to his not meeting body fat standards lacked credibility. 

3.  A review of the doctor’s statement, provided by the applicant, shows that the doctor does not independently confirm that the applicant’s injury resulted in the weight gain that led to his disenrollment from the USASMC.  The doctor only restates the applicant’s belief that this was the case.  The Board finds this medical evidence does not support the applicant’s theory that his injury led to an inordinate weight gain and in his exceeding body fat standards.

4.  In the opinion of the Board, the fact that the applicant did not consult a doctor in regard to his injury until April 1999, almost a year subsequent to receiving the injury, detracts from the credence given the doctor’s letter in regard to the effect the applicant’s injury had on his weight gain and body fat content at the time of his disenrollment from the USASMC.  Therefore, the Board concludes that the applicant has failed to meet the cogent reasons test of the regulation for reinstatement into the USASMC, and consequently there is no basis for granting the requested relief.

5.  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.

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

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___sk___  ___ja____  ___reb__  DENY APPLICATION

		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000038549	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/08/08	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	N/A	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	N/A	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	N/A	
DISCHARGE REASON	N/A	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  281	126.0400	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.