BOARD DATE: 23 May 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160000672 BOARD VOTE: _________ _______ ________ 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: 23 May 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160000672 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. ______________x___________ CHAIRPERSON 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. BOARD DATE: 23 May 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160000672 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, in effect, an upgrade of her entry-level separation from uncharacterized to honorable. 2. The applicant states she would like her uncharacterized discharge changed to an honorable discharge because she was injured while in the Army and was misdiagnosed. She was given the option to be recycled, but because she knew her injury was worse than a back strain, she asked to be discharged. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has given her a 40 percent service-connected disability rating due to her injury. She believes her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) should show she was a good Soldier and did nothing wrong to be discharged. 3. The applicant provides a page from her VA decision document, undated. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing. 2. On 18 September 1990, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army (RA). 3. The applicant's complete medical record is not available for review. However, her DA Form 705 (APFT Scorecard) shows that while in basic training, she had a physical profile on 15 October 1990 and on 6 November 1990 that prevented her from taking the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT.) 4. DA Forms 4856 (General Counseling Form) show: a. On 6 November 1990, she was counseled on the fact that she was given three opportunities to pass the APFT (1 October 1990, 15 October 1990, and November 1990), but failed to meet the minimum standards of 20 percent in each event due to prolonged injuries with a profile. The regulatory guidance mandated that she pass the APFT with a 50 percentile in each event in order to graduate from basic training. Her lackadaisical performance throughout the testing periods has resulted in numerous man-hours of additional physical training and administrative concerns to the command. b. On 11 November 1990 and on 15 November 1990, she was counseled that she was being considered for separation under Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 11 (Trainee Discharge Program). The counseling statements states her performance in physical fitness had been below standards since she began basic training, and she had spent most of her time on profile. Her lack of motivation and desire to remain in the Army contributed to her being recommended for separation. 5. On 15 November 1990, the applicant was recommended for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 11-3, for failure to meet minimum physical fitness standards and for a lack of motivation. 6. On 15 November 1990, the applicant acknowledged notification of the proposed separation from the Army. She initialed the notification letter indicating that she was afforded the opportunity to consult with counsel, and she did not desire to exercise that right or provide statements in her own behalf. 7. On 28 November 1990, the appropriate authority approved the applicant's discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 11 and directed the applicant be discharged with uncharacterized service. 8. On 4 December 1990, the applicant was discharged accordingly. Her DD Form 214 shows the reason for separation was “Entry Level Status” and her service was uncharacterized. She was credited with 2 months and 17 days of total active service. 9. There is no indication she applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for a change of her discharge within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations. 10. The applicant provides a letter from the VA that shows she was given a 40 percent combined disability rating, with an underlying10 percent rating for radiculopathy in her left lower extremity and a 10 percent rating for radiculopathy in her right lower extremity. REFERENCES: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. a. Chapter 11 provides for the separation of Soldiers in an entry-level status (less than 180 days of creditable active service from the date of the initiation of the separation action) who have demonstrated they are not qualified for retention. Specifically cited as an example which would render an individual not qualified for retention were those Soldiers who "cannot or will not adapt socially or emotionally to military life." Individuals discharged under the provisions of chapter 11 received an "entry level performance and conduct" statement as the narrative reason for their separation. The service of Soldiers discharged under this authority is uncharacterized. b. Paragraph 3-7a provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member’s service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate. c. Paragraph 3-7b provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. DISCUSSION: 1. The applicant contends, in effect, that the Board should upgrade her uncharacterized service to an honorable discharge due to an injury she received in basic training. 2. The evidence of record shows that the applicant's discharge and characterization was proper because she was discharged for a failure to meet physical fitness standards and a lack of motivation. The applicant's separation processing was accomplished in accordance with the applicable regulation. All requirements of law and regulation were met and her rights were fully protected throughout the separation process. She had less than 180 days of creditable active service at the time of initiation of the separation action, which dictated that her service would be uncharacterized. 3. Although the applicant provides a letter from the VA that shows she received a disability rating of 40 percent, it does not change the fact that she served less than 180 days of creditable service. 5. An uncharacterized discharge is not meant to be a negative reflection of a Soldier's military service. It merely means the Soldier has not been in the Army long enough for his or her character of service to be rated as honorable or otherwise. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160000672 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160000672 4 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2