ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 13 January 2022 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20210011320 APPLICANT REQUESTS: The applicant requests an upgrade of her uncharacterized service to honorable. APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) FACTS: 1. The applicant did not file within the 3-year time frame provided in Title 10, United States Code, section 1552(b); however, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) conducted a substantive review of this case and determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. 2. The applicant states she was separated from service for having flat feet. Before enlisting in the Army she never had problems with her feet until she began training in boot camp. Her feet stayed swollen and achy due to marching for miles in Army boots and in her physical fitness shoes. After talking to drill sergeants, she was able to see a physician at Fort Jackson, SC, and was given restrictions for physical activities. 3. On 7 February 2001, the applicant underwent a pre-entry physical examination; the results indicated she was qualified for enlistment in the Army. The report of medical examination states she had mild asymptomatic pes planus (flatfoot). 4. On 20 February 2001, she enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years and was assigned to Fort Jackson, SC, for initial training. Her records show: a. On 12 March 2001, after 2 weeks in basic training and 4 days after a ruck march, she received medical care for knee and leg pain. On 15 March 2001, she received follow up care for pain at the bottom of her feet and her back. The physician diagnosed her with antalgic gait (an abnormal pattern of walking secondary to pain that ultimately causes a limp) and pes planus and prescribed her ibuprofen with a 3-day profile. b. On 24 March 2001, 4 weeks into basic training, she received followup care for her back, feet, knees, and hip pain. On 25 March 2001, she received followup care for lower back pain and numbness in her feet and was currently on crutches. c. On 26 March 2001, she received care and a profile not exceeding 30 days for lower back, feet, knee and back leg pain, and numbness in her feet. She was instructed to wear running shoes and use crutches and was restricted from running, marching, jumping, crawling, dangling, stooping, climbing, kitchen patrol, lifting more than 10 pounds, and standing more than 10 minutes. 5. Her records provide a copy of an Existed Prior to Service (EPTS) Medical Board that shows: a. On 26 March 2001, the Patient Affairs Branch, Moncrief Army Community Hospital, initiated an EPTS Medical Board on the applicant. b. On 28 March 2001, the brigade legal center informed the applicant’s commander that she was found medically unfit for enlistment per medical fitness standards, and in the opinion of physicians, the condition ETPS. c. On 30 March and 2 April 2001, the applicant’s unit and intermediate commanders state she was counseled. She elected and her chain of command recommended that she be discharged. d. The specific findings of the evaluating physicians for the EPTS Medical Board are unavailable due to the applicant’s records only consist of page two of the DA Form 4707 (Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSBD)) proceedings. (1) The evaluating physicians would have diagnosed her with a condition that EPTS and recommend that she be separated under the provisions of Army Regulation (AR) 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness). (2) On 30 March 2001, the applicant concurred with the proceedings and requested to be discharged from the U.S. Army. Her unit commander endorsed the request, and on 4 April 2001, the appropriate authority approved the request for discharge. The applicant did not complete basic training. 6. The applicant provides her DD Form 214 that shows on 11 April 2001, she was discharged accordingly. Her DD Form 214 shows she was separated according to AR 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-11, for failure to meet medical procurement standards with an uncharacterized characterization of service. She completed 1 month and 22 days of her 3-year contractual obligation. 7. AR 635-200, in effect at the time, stated commanders were to separate Soldiers who were not medically qualified under procurement medical fitness standards when they enlisted. EPSBD proceedings were required to be convened within the Soldier's first 6 months of active duty service, and had to establish the following: that medical authority had identified the disqualifying medical condition(s) within 6 months of the Soldier's initial entry on active duty; that the condition(s) would have permanently disqualified the Soldier from entry into military service, had they been detected earlier; and that the medical condition did not disqualify him/her for retention in military service. A Soldier disqualified under this provision could request retention on active duty; the separation authority made the final determination. 8. AR 635-200, provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 5-11 specifically provides that Soldiers who were not medically qualified under procurement medical fitness standards, when accepted for enlistment, or who became medically disqualified under these standards prior to entrance on active duty or active duty training or initial entry training will be separated. Such conditions must be discovered during the first 6 months of active duty and will result in an EPSBD. The characterization of service for Soldiers separated under this provision of regulation will normally be honorable, but will be uncharacterized if the Soldier is in an entry level status. On a case-by-case basis, Headquarters, Department of the Army could direct the issuance of an honorable character of service when clearly warranted by unusual circumstances involving personal conduct and/or duty performance. 9. The record shows she received an uncharacterized character of service because she was separated while in an entry level status (within 180 days of date entered on active duty). BOARD DISCUSSION: 1. After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found relief is not warranted. 2. The Board found the applicant was discharged for an EPTS condition while she was in an entry-level status. As a result her service was uncharacterized in accordance with the governing regulation. The Board determined the fact that the applicant's service is uncharacterized is not in error or unjust. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : GRANT FULL RELIEF : : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING :XX :XX :XXX DENY APPLICATION 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. REFERENCES: 1. Title 10, United States 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 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. 2. AR 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), in effect at the time, prescribed policies and procedures for enlisted administrative separations. a. An honorable discharge was a separation with honor. The honorable characterization was appropriate when the quality of the Soldier's service generally met the standards of acceptable conduct and duty performance. b. A general discharge was a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When authorized, it was issued to a Soldier whose military record was satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. c. Uncharacterized Separations. Soldiers separated in an entry-level status receive an uncharacterized character of service. A separation is an entry level status separation if its processing is initiated during the Soldier's first 180 days of continuous active duty. The Secretary of the Army could, on a case-by-case basis, issue an honorable character of service to entry-level Soldiers when clearly warranted by unusual circumstances involving personal conduct or duty performance. d. Paragraph 5-11 specifically provided that Soldiers who were not medically qualified under procurement medical fitness standards when accepted for enlistment were to be separated. EPSBD proceedings were required to be convened within the Soldier's first 6 months of active duty service, and had to establish the following: that medical authority identified the disqualifying medical condition(s) within 6 months of the Soldier's initial entrance on active duty; that the condition(s) would have permanently disqualified the Soldier from entry into military service, had it been detected earlier; and that the medical condition did not disqualify him/her for retention in military service. A Soldier disqualified under this provision could request retention on active duty; the separation authority made the final determination. 3. AR 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation), in effect at the time, governed the evaluation for physical fitness of Soldiers would might be unfit to perform their military duties due to a disability. It states the mere presence of an impairment did not, of itself, justify a finding of unfitness due to physical disability. In each case, it was necessary to compare the nature and degree of the physical disability with the duty requirements of the Soldier, based on his or her office, grade, rank, or rating; and a Soldier was presumed to be in sound physical and mental condition upon entering active duty. 4. On 25 July 2018, the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness issued guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records (BCM/NRs) regarding equity, injustice, or clemency determinations. Clemency generally refers to relief specifically granted from a criminal sentence. BCM/NRs may grant clemency regardless of the type of court-martial. However, the guidance applies to more than clemency from a sentencing in a court- martial; it also applies to other corrections, including changes in a discharge, which may be warranted based on equity or relief from injustice. a. This guidance does not mandate relief, but rather provides standards and principles to guide Boards in application of their equitable relief authority. In determining whether to grant relief on the basis of equity, injustice, or clemency grounds, BCM/NRs shall consider the prospect for rehabilitation, external evidence, sworn testimony, policy changes, relative severity of misconduct, mental and behavioral health conditions, official governmental acknowledgement that a relevant error or injustice was committed, and uniformity of punishment. b. Changes to the narrative reason for discharge and/or an upgraded character of service granted solely on equity, injustice, or clemency grounds normally should not result in separation pay, retroactive promotions, and payment of past medical expenses or similar benefits that might have been received if the original discharge had been for the revised reason or had the upgraded service characterization. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20210011320 4 1