Author: CoopeWL

ABCMR Memorandum of                                                             AR1999032526
Consideration (cont)

MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           13 April 2000                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999032526

	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.

| Mrs. Nancy Amos | | Analyst

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

| Mr. Fred Eichorn | | Chairperson
| Ms. Celia L. Adolphi | | Member
| Ms. Sherri V. Ward | | 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:  That the entry “…and there is no evidence of service aggravation…” be removed from his DA Form 199, Physical Evaluation Board Proceedings.

APPLICANT STATES:  That prior to his entry on active duty he was taking a psychotropic medication.  While at Fort Eustis, VA he was denied the opportunity to go on sick call to have the prescription refilled.  On 26 April 1976, he was physically assaulted by two of the four military policemen who transported him to the hospital.  He provides no supporting evidence.

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

After having had prior service in the U. S. Army Reserve, he enlisted in the Regular Army on 23 March 1976.

SF Form 502, Clinical Record Narrative Summary dated 30 April 1976, the date the applicant was admitted to Walter Reed Army Medical Center (WRAMC), described the history of the applicant’s illness.  He had been told to meet his platoon on the baseball field but no one was there.  As he walked along towards the hospital (near the ball field) and approached the helicopter pad he noticed what he described as dozens of patient’s addressograph cards on the ground.  A child came up to him and told him there had been a plane crash and the cards must have belonged to the victims.  The applicant picked up the cards, took them to the hospital, and became agitated when no one believed him.  He reportedly ransacked the hospital and ran out of the hospital but was later apprehended by the military police and kept in custody until he was taken to WRAMC.  He was diagnosed with schizophrenia, paranoid type, acute and severe, EPTS.

On 18 June 1976, a medical evaluation board determined the applicant was medically unfit for duty with a diagnosis of schizophrenia and recommended he be referred to a physical evaluation board (PEB).  He was determined to be mentally competent for pay purposes and to have the capacity to understand the nature of and to cooperate in PEB procedures.

On 28 June 1976, an informal PEB found the applicant to be unfit for duty due to schizophrenia, paranoid type and determined his condition was EPTS with no evidence of service aggravation.  The applicant nonconcurred and demanded a formal hearing.

On 11 August 1976, a formal PEB was held.  The applicant appeared and testified in his own behalf.  The transcripts of the board show that he never discussed being assaulted by the military police.  The PEB found him to be unfit 

for duty due to schizophrenia, paranoid type and determined his condition was EPTS with no evidence of service aggravation.  The PEB recommended his separation without entitlement to disability benefits.  The applicant elected to wait until the proceedings were mailed to him to indicate whether he would accept or decline to accept the recommendations.  There is no evidence of record to show he submitted a later appeal.  

On 27 September 1976, the applicant was honorably discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-40, paragraph 4-19e(4).

Army Regulation 635-40 governs the evaluation for physical fitness of soldiers who may be unfit to perform their military duties because of physical disability.  Paragraph 4-19e(4) provides that soldiers who are unfit by reason of physical disability neither incurred nor aggravated during any period of service while entitled to basic pay, or as the proximate result of performing active duty or inactive duty training, but which affects duty performance, will be separated for physical disability without entitlement to benefits.

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 the aforementioned requirement.

2.  The applicant’s separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.  The applicant provides no evidence to show that he was assaulted by military police nor that such an assault would have aggravated his medical condition.  

3.  It is not the policy of the Board to create or alter service medical records.  Such records merely reflect the observations and opinions of medical examiners at the time they were recorded.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Board presumes the applicant’s DA Form 199 contains the correct information.  Subsequent interpretations of these records fall within the jurisdiction of the agency administering benefits based on the facts recorded.

4.  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

__fe____  __cla___  __svw___  DENY APPLICATION

Karl F. Schneider
Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID | AR1999032526
SUFFIX |
RECON |
DATE BOARDED | 20000413
TYPE OF DISCHARGE |
DATE OF DISCHARGE |
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY |
DISCHARGE REASON |
BOARD DECISION | (DENY)
REVIEW AUTHORITY |
ISSUES         1. | 108.00
2. |
3. |
4. |
5. |
6. |