MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           12 December 2000                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000047800

	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	
	Mrs. Nancy Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Fred N. Eichorn		Chairperson	
	Ms. Lana E. McGlynn		Member	
	Mr. Harry B. Oberg		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 his separation be changed to a length- of-service retirement.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was denied reenlistment or extension for the purpose of retirement because he was unable to pass an Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) due to his disabilities.  He was placed on orders to Korea his last year but his commander would not raise a bar to reenlistment because of his inability to pass the APFT.  He was on a temporary profile for an appendectomy in 1982 and was re-operated on in 1983.  He also had a history of knee problems.  He was never offered a physical evaluation board.  He was never compensated with involuntary separation pay.

COUNSEL CONTENDS:  Counsel makes no additional contention.

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

After having had prior service, he reenlisted in the Regular Army in 1968.

In March 1984, the applicant was advised that he had come down on assignment to Korea with an arrival month of September 1984.  Since his current expiration term of service (ETS) was 16 December 1984, he had to extend or reenlist so as to have a minimum of 12 months remaining to ETS as of September 1984.  He was advised of the options available to acquire sufficient remaining service to satisfy the commitment but had refused to take necessary action to meet the length-of-service requirement.  On 10 April 1984, the applicant acknowledged that he was counseled concerning action required by him to satisfy a length-of-service requirement incident to an operational commitment and regarding his refusal to extend or reenlist to comply with the commitment.  He acknowledged that he understood the effects his refusal would have on his Army career and on any future decision he might make concerning reenlistment or enlistment after separation.  

There is no evidence of record to show that the applicant had a bar to reenlistment for failing to pass an APFT or for any other reason.

The applicant’s medical records show that he was on temporary physical profiles for knee pain from 26 March 1980 – 15 September 1980.  He was on intermittent temporary physical profiles for incisional pain from 7 July 1981 – 12 May 1982.

The applicant’s Personnel Qualification Record, DA Form 2A, dated 10 May 1984 shows that he had a physical category code of A, 111111 (no assignment limitation, considered to possess a high level of medical fitness).  

The applicant completed a separation physical examination on 7 September 1984.  He was found qualified for separation.  
On 16 December 1984, the applicant was released from active duty upon the completion of his ETS.  He was given a reenlistment code of 3A (persons with over 4 years of service for pay who incurred an additional service requirement and who declined to meet additional service through reenlistment or extension and were separated on or after 5 August 1978).  He had completed 19 years and 28 days of active federal service.

On 17 December 1984, the applicant enlisted in the U. S. Army Reserve Control Group (Reinforcement) for 3 years.  On 25 August 1988, he completed an     over- 40 physical examination.  He noted on his Report of Medical History,       SF Form 93, that he was in good health.  He was found qualified for retention with a physical category code of A, 111111.

Army Regulation 635-40 governs the evaluation of physical fitness of soldiers who may be unfit to perform their military duties because of physical disability.  The regulation defines “physically unfit” as unfitness due to physical disability.  The unfitness is of such a degree that a soldier is unable to perform the duties of his office, grade, rank or rating in such a way as to reasonably fulfill the purposes of his employment on active duty.

Department of the Army message 242130Z July 1991, subject:  Transition Assistance, provided information on transition benefits available to soldiers who were involuntarily separated.  For transition assistance purposes, “involuntary separation” meant release from active duty of any soldier on or after                    30 September 1990 and who was denied reenlistment/continuation or was involuntarily separated under other than adverse conditions.  In order to be eligible for separation pay, a soldier must meet a five-part test.  The soldier must:
1.  have completed at least 6 years but fewer than 20 years of active service;     2.  receive a service characterization of honorable or under honorable conditions (general); 3.  sign a written agreement to serve 3 years in the Ready Reserve;   4.  have completed an initial term of enlistment; and 5.  be involuntarily separated or denied reenlistment.

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.  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.

2.  There is no evidence of record to show that the applicant was barred from reenlisting due to APFT failure or any other reason.  The evidence of record shows that he was placed on assignment to Korea but he refused to take the necessary action to meet the length-of-service requirement incident to that operational commitment.  This was a voluntary action on his part that resulted in his separating from the active Army with 19 years and 28 days of active federal service.

3.  The evidence of record shows that the applicant was never on a permanent physical profile.  He continued to serve in the U. S. Army Reserve after his separation from active duty and it was noted in 1988 that he had no physical profiles.  There was no evidence to show he was ever unfit for duty; therefore, he was not eligible for physical disability processing.

4.  In addition to voluntarily separating, the applicant separated prior to the establishment of involuntary separation pay.

5.  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

__fne___  __lem___  __hbo___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000047800	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20001212	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	136.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.