BOARD DATE: 3 April 2018 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160016927 BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : GRANT FULL RELIEF : : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING : X :X :X DENY APPLICATION 2 Enclosures 1. Board Determination/Recommendation 2. Evidence and Consideration BOARD DATE: 3 April 2018 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160016927 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests: a. rescission of her resignation in lieu of separation and b. reinstatement on active duty. 2. The applicant states: a. She is a psychologist who is being eliminated because she is unable to obtain her psychologist license within the time frame indicated in Army Regulation 40-68 (Clinical Quality Management). However, she is being treated unfairly and being unjustly eliminated/separated because the regulation for involuntary separation/elimination due to lack of qualification is not being equally enforced for other behavioral health officers who are under the same circumstances. b. She was assigned to Fort Sam Houston, TX, upon successful completion of her Clinical Psychology Residency Program at Brooke Army Medical Center in March 2015. Despite not being able to obtain her psychology licensure and being 7-8 months pregnant with her first child, she was informed she would be transferred to Fort Drum, NY. Shortly after giving birth in May 2015, she took the examination for the third time and was 10 points away from a passing score. In November 2015, she was given a strict deadline to retake the examination not later than 31 December 2015 or face potential administrative separation/ elimination. Due to the increased pressure, additional stress of meeting the strict deadline, a short suspense for retaking the examination, and the possibility that her military and professional career and livelihood were at stake, failure was inevitable despite her best efforts to succeed and pass. c. She is the sole financial provider for her family, as they are a single- income household. The possibility of being separated was very distressing due to the financial loss this would cause. Her journey toward licensure has caused accumulated financial strain due to additional expenses pertaining to licensure (i.e., application fees, study material expenses, and examination fees) on top of all of her existing family financial obligations and everyday needs. d. In retrospect, she believes all these factors contributed to her failed attempts, to include the emotional toll and negative thoughts about herself, increased pressure from her chain of command, and the increased performance anxiety due to previous failed attempts. e. On 7 January 2016, she was formally counseled regarding initiation of a flag and initiation of elimination proceedings. On 18 February 2016, she submitted a formal request for extension to obtain licensure. She did not receive a response from the U.S. Army Medical Command Commander until 29 July 2016 and her request was denied. On 24 May 2016, she received official notification of initiation of elimination. She inquired about her options and she consulted with legal counsel, but she was unable to get a clear explanation due to the rare nature of her situation. She was forced to choose the resignation in lieu of elimination out of necessity, thinking at the time this would be the least "aversive" to herself and family, given how much her situation was already impacting her and her family emotionally, professionally, and financially. f. On 21 October 2016, she received notification that her resignation in lieu of separation was approved, she would have 30 days to clear, and her separation date would be 21 November 2016. That is a very short amount of time to transition, considering everything she and her family would have to do, and she was not prepared. g. All she is asking for is fairness across the board with regard to enforcing eliminations/separations. She would like to have the same opportunity to continue serving or at least finish her contract. She has continually shown good faith, perseverance, and effort in attempting to pass the licensure examination, as evidenced by her multiple attempts despite all the challenges she has gone through. Additionally, she has proudly and honorably served for the past 12 years, with 8 of those years as a prior enlisted Soldier. 3. The applicant provides: * elimination notification, dated 11 May 2016 * extension request, dated 18 February 2016 * letter of resignation, dated 6 July 2016 * Office of the Surgeon General denial, dated 29 July 2016 * resignation approval, dated 21 October 2016 * separation orders, dated 24 October 2016 * DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) Worksheet CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Having prior enlisted service in the U.S. Army Reserve, the applicant was appointed as a second lieutenant in the U.S. Army Reserve on 9 February 2011. She was appointed as a captain in the Regular Army on 4 June 2012. 2. On 7 January 2014, she was formally counseled in writing of initiation of elimination proceedings for substandard performance of duty. 3. On 18 February 2016, she requested an extension to obtain her psychology licensure because she had been unable to pass the licensure examination for psychology – the Examination for Professional Practice of Psychology (EPPP) – within the time frame specified in Army Regulation 40-68 due to her extenuating circumstances. She took the examination four times without passing. Her extenuating circumstances included pregnancy and transferring to her first assignment while pregnant. 4. A memorandum from the Commander, Headquarters, 10th Mountain Division Sustainment Brigade, Fort Drum, NY, dated 8 April 2016, subject: Request for Initiation of Elimination Proceedings – (Applicant), Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 10th Special Troops Battalion, 10th Mountain Division Sustainment Brigade, Fort Drum, stated he reviewed the applicant's officer elimination packet. He recommended initiation of elimination proceedings in accordance with Army Regulation 600-8-24 (Officer Transfers and Discharges) and that she show cause before a Board of Inquiry for failing to obtain a current, active, valid, and unrestricted license, or other authorizing document within the time frame specified. 5. A memorandum from the Commander, Headquarters, Fort Drum, NY, dated 11 May 2016, subject: Initiation of Elimination, required the applicant to show cause for retention on active duty under the provisions of Army Regulation 600-8-24 due to her substandard duty performance. He cited her failure to pass the EPPP on five occasions and her inability to obtain her license and perform her duties as a psychologist as the specific reasons for elimination. She was advised that she could: a. submit a rebuttal with all supporting documentation to show how she either successfully overcame the reason for the show-cause proceeding or a statement explaining her past actions/behavior; b. submit a request for resignation in lieu of elimination in accordance with Army Regulation 600-8-24, chapter 4 (the request could not include an effective date since the effective date would be determined in accordance with Army Regulation 600-8-24, paragraph 4-5); c. submit a request for discharge in lieu of elimination in accordance with Army Regulation 600-8-24, chapter 4 (the request could not include an effective date since the effective date would be determined in accordance with Army Regulation 600-8-24, paragraph 4-5); d. apply for retirement in lieu of elimination, if otherwise eligible, in accordance with Army Regulation 600-8-24, chapter 4 and chapter 6 (must specifically state the application for retirement is submitted in lieu of elimination); or e. submit a declination statement and request appearance before a Board of Inquiry. 6. On 24 May 2016, she acknowledged receipt of the memorandum recommending her involuntary elimination from active duty. She elected to submit a resignation in lieu of elimination. 7. On 6 July 2016, she submitted a resignation in lieu of elimination proceedings. 8. On 29 July 2016, the Surgeon General and Commanding General, U.S. Army Medical Command, Office of the Surgeon General, denied the applicant's request for an extension to obtain licensure as a clinical psychologist. 9. On 21 October 2016, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army, Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Manpower and Reserve Affairs, accepted the applicant's resignation in lieu of elimination and directed the issuance of an honorable discharge. 10. On 21 November 2016, she was honorably discharged by reason of substandard performance. 11. An advisory opinion was rendered by the Psychology Consultant to the Surgeon General, Office of the Surgeon General, dated 29 December 2017, wherein he stated: a. While on active duty, the applicant failed to pass the EPPP within the time frame prescribed in Army Regulation 40-68. Passing the EPPP is a necessary step for obtaining a license to practice clinical psychology. Having failed to complete this requirement within the prescribed time frame, she was appropriately advised of the consequences and her options. She elected to resign in lieu of elimination. b. The applicant references situational factors that may have contributed to her inability to pass the EPPP and she asserts these should be considered as mitigating circumstances. However, those factors she cites, including the stress of having to pass the test, are very common among clinical psychology (area of concentration 73B) trainees at this point in their careers. It should be noted that she failed to pass the EPPP four times over the course of 2 years despite accommodations being granted to help her prepare. Meanwhile, roughly 80 percent of psychologists nationwide and 90 percent of psychologists within the Army pass the EPPP on their first attempt. Also of note, her petition does not provide evidence that she subsequently passed the EPPP or obtained a license. Therefore, she still would be unable to perform duties of a clinical psychologist if she were reinstated. c. The Office of the Surgeon General finds no basis to support the applicant's request. 12. A copy of the advisory opinion was provided to the applicant for comment and/or rebuttal. She did not respond. REFERENCES: 1. Army Regulation 600-8-24, paragraph 4-2 (Reasons for Elimination), states elimination action may be or will be initiated for substandard performance of duty. 2. Army Regulation 40-68 prescribes policies, procedures, and responsibilities for administration of the Clinical Quality Management Program. a. Paragraph 4-6a states professionals directly accessed from a training program who require a license, certification, and/or registration to practice must obtain such authorizing documents within 1 year of the date when all required didactic and clinical requirements are met, within 1 year of completion of postgraduate year 1 for physicians, and within 2 years after award of the doctoral degree for clinical psychologists. b. Paragraph 4-10(a)(6) (Failure to Obtain or Maintain a License, Certification, and/or Registration) states Regular Army and U.S. Army Reserve officers who are not in compliance with this regulation may be involuntarily separated from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 600-8-24. DISCUSSION: 1. The applicant requests rescission of her resignation in lieu of separation and reinstatement on active duty. She contends she was treated unfairly and unjustly eliminated/separated because the regulation for involuntary separation/ elimination due to lack of qualification is not being equally enforced with other behavioral health officers who are under the same circumstances. 2. The evidence of record shows: a. The applicant failed to pass the EPPP four times within the time frame prescribed in the governing regulation and elimination proceedings were initiated against her due to substandard performance. b. She elected to resign in lieu of elimination. c. Her resignation in lieu of elimination was accepted by the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army, Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Manpower and Reserve Affairs. 3. The Office of the Surgeon General found no basis to support the applicant's request. BOARD DATE: 3 April 2018 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160016927 BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160016927 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160016927 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2