MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

           IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:           30 August 2001    
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001051506 

	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	
	Ms. Rosa M. Chandler		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O'Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Mr. Christopher J. Prosser		Member	
	Ms. Linda D. Simmons                           		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 she be reinstated into the Army with the rank of sergeant, pay grade E-5, or at the rank that she would have attained had she continued to serve.  She requests compensation for her psychological and emotional problems and compensation for the financial stress that she and her family has endured for the past 5 years.  She also requests that her educational benefits be extended when she is reinstated.   

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that the nonjudicial punishment (NJP) that she received was a tyrannical act on the part of her commander.  Her punishment for a first time offense was extremely harsh, she had 7 years of exemplary service and her commander refused to take this service into consideration.  She also contends that she was never given a counseling statement for failure to be at Army Physical Fitness Training on 11 April 1994, or for failure to be at corrective training on 18 April 1994, or for dereliction in the performance of duties in the barracks.  Additionally, the applicant states that she was experiencing financial difficulty at the time of her discharge because both she and her husband owned homes near Fort Gordon, Georgia.  She was assigned at Fort Stewart, Georgia and her husband was employed at Fort Gordon and neither could be transferred so they could be together.  She submits a memorandum, from the 24th Personnel Services Battalion, dated 24 August 1994, that substantiates financial hardship.  She also submits two general counseling forms with rebuttals; two letters from a medical doctor with dates of 10 October 1994 and 16 November 2000; a certificate of training; four sick leave slips for the month of September; an NJP record of proceedings, dated 12 October 1994; and a DA Form 4187 (Personnel Actions) request to reduce her from pay grade E-5 to pay grade E-4.

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

That prior to the enlistment under review, she served in the Regular Army (RA) from 27 February 1987 to 14 December 1992.  On 15 December 1992, she reenlisted in the RA for a period of 4 years in pay grade E-5 and in her previous military occupational specialty (MOS) of 75D (Record Specialist).  

On 24 May 1990 while assigned to Fort Gordon, the applicant was issued a permanent physical profile for "PES CAVUS."  She was authorized to wear Rockport Shoes and she was to do aerobic conditioning exercises at her own pace.

On 24 July 1990, the Military Occupational Specialty (MOS)/Medical Retention Board (MMRB) determined that the applicant's permanent medical condition did not prevent her from performing her full range of physical tasks required of her MOS in a worldwide field environment.  The board recommended that she be retained in her MOS 75D1R3 (Personnel Records Specialist).  On 17 August 1990, the recommendation was approved.

The applicant served successfully in Korea from 8 June 1992-26 June 1993 without any recorded indisciplines.

On 18 January 1994, she was assigned to Fort Stewart.  On 23 March 1994, she was issued a physical profile for chronic heel pain in both feet.  She was to perform APFT at her own pace to tolerance, and she was authorized to march up to 1/2 mile.

On 12 October 1994, NJP under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, was imposed against the applicant for failure to go to her appointed place of duty (accountability formation) at the time prescribed on 27 and 28 September 1994.  Her punishment included reduction from pay grade E-5 to pay grade E-4.  The DA Form 4187, dated 12 October 1994, that the applicant submitted shows that she was reduced to pay grade E-4 as of this date.

On 29 September 1994, the applicant authenticated a DA Form 4856 with her own signature acknowledging that she had been counseled for failure to be at Army Physical Fitness Training formation on 11 April 1994, 13-16, 27 and 
28 September 1994.  She also acknowledged that she had been counseled for dereliction in the performance of her duties in the barracks and that she failed to be at corrective training on 18 April 1994.  Additionally, on 29 September 1994, she was counseled concerning possible separation from the Army under the provisions of chapter 13, Army Regulation 635-200. 

On 18 October 1994, the applicant voluntarily requested in writing that she be discharged in accordance with her Retention Control Point (RCP), chapter
16-8, Army Regulation 635-200, due to reduction in force.  She also requested that the chapter 13 paperwork be withdrawn and she stated that she would not appeal the NJP.

On the same date, the applicant’s commander recommended that the request be approved.  The available records do not contain a separation medical examination.

On 26 February 1995, the applicant was discharged.  Her records do not contain the approved recommendation.  However, her records do contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) that was signed by the applicant at the time of discharge.

The applicant’s DD Form 214 shows that she was discharged under the provisions of chapter 16-8, Army Regulation 635-200, due to reduction in force with a HD.  She had completed 2 years, 2 months and 11 days of active military service.  She had completed 5 years, 9 months and 18 days of prior active military service.  She had no recorded lost time.  She received $12,695.04 in separation pay.
On 10 October 1994, a civilian medical doctor diagnosed the applicant to have a Type A personality with extreme excessive, compulsive personality traits.  She was obsessed with cleaning and neatness and the doctor felt it hard to believe that the she would not perform tasks to anyone's standards.  On 16 November 2000, a second civilian medical doctor determined that the applicant suffered from bipolar disorder that was mixed, moderate, and recurrent.  Her condition was exacerbated by situational stressors, which affected her level of function currently and historically.  She was in compliance with her medical treatment to stabilize her mood.  She was also treated for depression, anxiety and severe disorganization with hallucination at brief intervals.  She was oriented, alert and cooperative.  Her speech was fluent, coherent and appropriate to content.  She denied substance abuse or destructive ideation's, intentions or plans.  Her prognosis was determined to be indefinite.  The plan was for her to continue her current treatment.

She served in the US Army Reserve from 21 May 1997 until she was honorably discharged 20 May 1999.

Army Regulation 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 16-8 of this regulation sets forth the requirements for early separation of enlisted personnel due to reduction in force, strength limitations, or budgetary constraints.  Army policy states that the service of personnel separated under this chapter will be characterized as honorable.

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.  The available records do not contain the approval authority's statement. However, the applicant voluntarily requested discharge under the provisions of chapter 16-8, Army Regulation 635-200, due to reduction in force.  She apparently made this request because of her perceived inability to overcome her reduction in rank and to avoid the chapter 13 discharge that was in process.  Her administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would have jeopardized her rights.  The Board presumes regularity in the discharge process.  She has provided no information that would indicate the contrary.   

3.  On 12 October 1994, the applicant was reduced to pay grade E-4 and there is no evidence to indicate that she ever attained the rank of sergeant, pay grade 
E-5 again. 
4.  The Board empathizes with the applicant concerning her medical problems.  However, there is no evidence to indicate that her problems are service connected.  Further, she has provided no basis to show service connection, or to show that she should be reinstated or somehow compensated for these problems. 

5.  Entitlement to veteran’s benefits is not a matter under the purview of this Board, but rests with the Department of Veteran Affairs. 

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

_RVO___  __CJP___  ___LDS _  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001051506	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20010830	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19950226	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200, Chapter 16  	
DISCHARGE REASON	A04.00	
BOARD DECISION	(NC)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	144.0400	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.